Benchmark: find vs lodash find

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="lodash.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var array = [...Array(100000).keys()];

Tests:

Array.prototype
array.find(n => n === 99999)
lodash
_.find(n => n === 99999)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype
lodash

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. A benchmark is a test that measures the performance of a specific piece of code or algorithm. In this case, we have two individual test cases: `Array.prototype` and `lodash.find`.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition JSON contains information about the benchmark, such as its name, description, script preparation code, and HTML preparation code. The script preparation code is used to initialize the variables used in the benchmark, while the HTML preparation code includes a reference to an external library (in this case, Lodash).

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare the performance of `Array.prototype.find` and `lodash.find`. These two functions are used to find the first element in an array that satisfies a certain condition.

Here's what we're testing:

* `Array.prototype.find`: This is a built-in function in JavaScript that searches for the first element in an array that matches a given condition. It takes two arguments: the callback function and the array.
* `lodash.find`: This is a function from the Lodash library, which is a popular utility library for functional programming in JavaScript. The `find` function also takes two arguments: the predicate function (the callback) and the array.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

### Array.prototype.find

* Pros:
	+ Built-in function, so it's likely to be highly optimized.
	+ Only requires a single pass through the array, making it efficient for large datasets.
* Cons:
	+ May not work as expected in older browsers that don't support modern JavaScript features.
	+ Can be slower than Lodash's implementation if the predicate is complex or computationally expensive.

### lodash.find

* Pros:
	+ Well-tested and optimized by the developers of Lodash.
	+ Supports a wide range of browsers, including older ones.
	+ Can handle more complex predicates due to its functional programming nature.
* Cons:
	+ Requires an external library, which may add overhead.
	+ May have a higher memory footprint than the built-in `Array.prototype.find` implementation.

**Library and Purpose**

Lodash is a popular utility library for functional programming in JavaScript. Its purpose is to provide a collection of high-quality, reusable functions that can be used to simplify code and improve performance. In this case, the `lodash.find` function provides an alternative implementation to the built-in `Array.prototype.find` function.

**Other Considerations**

When running benchmarks like these, it's essential to consider factors such as:

* Data size: How large is the dataset being tested?
* Performance requirements: What are the performance goals for this specific use case?
* Browser support: Are older browsers included in the testing environment?

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative libraries or implementations, some popular options include:

* Other utility libraries like Underscore.js or Ramda.js
* Custom implementations of the `find` function using JavaScript's built-in methods (e.g., using `reduce` or `some`)
* Third-party libraries like Fastify or Bun.js, which provide optimized implementations of various functions, including `find`.

I hope this explanation helps you understand what's going on in these benchmarks!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/108.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/108.0.1462.54

Browser/OS: Chrome 108 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype	1084.8 Ops/sec
lodash	2260114.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

find vs lodash find (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype vs lodash

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype

lodash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):