Benchmark: Lodash Chunk vs Native Reduce v3

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js'></script>

AخA
 
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js'></script>  

Script Preparation code:

function chunk(input, size) {
  
  const length= input.length;
  const chunksLenght= length/size;
  
  if(chunksLenght<0){
    return input;
  }
  
  const chunks=[];
  
  let index = 0;
  
  for(let i =0 ;i < chunksLenght ; i++){
    chunks.push(input.slice(index , index + size));
    index += size;
  }
  
  // the remainig 
  if(index < length){
     chunks.push(input.slice(index , length));
  }
  
  
  return chunks;
};

​x
 
​function chunk(input, size) {    const length= input.length;  const chunksLenght= length/size;    if(chunksLenght<0){    return input;  }    const chunks=[];    let index = 0;    for(let i =0 ;i < chunksLenght ; i++){    chunks.push(input.slice(index , index + size));    index += size;  }    // the remainig   if(index < length){     chunks.push(input.slice(index , length));  }      return chunks;};

Tests:

Lodash
_.chunk(['a', 'b', 'c'], 3);
_.chunk(['a', 'b', 'c'], 3);
Native
chunk(['a', 'b', 'c'], 3);
chunk(['a', 'b', 'c'], 3);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/105.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 105 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	5650757.0 Ops/sec
Native	8009918.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 4 months ago):

Let's dive into the explanation.

Benchmark Overview

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark in question compares the performance of two approaches for chunking an array: Lodash's chunk function (native implementation) vs native JavaScript implementation (chunk).

Options Compared

The benchmark tests two options:

Lodash's chunk function: A utility function from the popular JavaScript library Lodash that provides a way to split an array into smaller chunks.
Native JavaScript Implementation: A custom implementation of the chunk function using pure JavaScript, without relying on any external libraries.

Pros and Cons

Native JavaScript Implementation (Lodash)

Pros:

Fast execution due to optimized native code
Low memory usage since it doesn't rely on a library
Easy to understand and implement for those familiar with JavaScript basics

Cons:

May not be as readable or maintainable as Lodash's implementation
Requires manual management of array indexing and bounds checking
May have issues with edge cases, such as empty arrays or invalid input sizes

Lodash's chunk Function

Pros:

Well-tested and optimized code from a reputable library
Robust handling of edge cases and invalid inputs
More readable and maintainable than native implementation
Easy to use and integrate into existing projects

Cons:

Slower execution due to the overhead of a JavaScript library
Higher memory usage since it relies on Lodash's internal state
Requires additional setup and import statements in the project

Library: Lodash

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like array manipulation, string formatting, and more. The chunk function is one of its many utility functions, designed to split an array into smaller chunks.

Special JS Feature/ Syntax

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark.

Other Alternatives

If you're interested in exploring other approaches for chunking arrays, consider the following alternatives:

Array.prototype.slice(): You can use slice() method to create a new array by extracting a subset of elements from an existing array. This approach is simple but may not be as efficient as native implementation or Lodash's chunk.
Underscore.js (other utility functions): Underscore.js, another popular JavaScript library, provides various utility functions for tasks like array manipulation, string formatting, and more. You can explore other functions in the library to see if they provide better performance or ease of use.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be as efficient or well-tested as native implementation or Lodash's chunk function.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark in question compares the performance of two approaches for chunking an array: Lodash's `chunk` function (native implementation) vs native JavaScript implementation (`chunk`).

**Options Compared**

The benchmark tests two options:

1. **Lodash's `chunk` function**: A utility function from the popular JavaScript library Lodash that provides a way to split an array into smaller chunks.
2. **Native JavaScript Implementation**: A custom implementation of the `chunk` function using pure JavaScript, without relying on any external libraries.

**Pros and Cons**

**Native JavaScript Implementation (Lodash)**

Pros:

* Fast execution due to optimized native code
* Low memory usage since it doesn't rely on a library
* Easy to understand and implement for those familiar with JavaScript basics

Cons:

* May not be as readable or maintainable as Lodash's implementation
* Requires manual management of array indexing and bounds checking
* May have issues with edge cases, such as empty arrays or invalid input sizes

**Lodash's `chunk` Function**

Pros:

* Well-tested and optimized code from a reputable library
* Robust handling of edge cases and invalid inputs
* More readable and maintainable than native implementation
* Easy to use and integrate into existing projects

Cons:

* Slower execution due to the overhead of a JavaScript library
* Higher memory usage since it relies on Lodash's internal state
* Requires additional setup and import statements in the project

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like array manipulation, string formatting, and more. The `chunk` function is one of its many utility functions, designed to split an array into smaller chunks.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring other approaches for chunking arrays, consider the following alternatives:

* **Array.prototype.slice()**: You can use `slice()` method to create a new array by extracting a subset of elements from an existing array. This approach is simple but may not be as efficient as native implementation or Lodash's `chunk`.
* **Underscore.js (other utility functions)**: Underscore.js, another popular JavaScript library, provides various utility functions for tasks like array manipulation, string formatting, and more. You can explore other functions in the library to see if they provide better performance or ease of use.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be as efficient or well-tested as native implementation or Lodash's `chunk` function.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash Chunk vs Native Reduce v3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Native

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 4 months ago):