Benchmark: lodash.each vs Object.forEach

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var a = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'g', 'h'];
var b = ['c', 'f', 'g'];

Tests:

lodash.difference
_.difference(a, b)
native
a.filter(i => !b.includes(b))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.difference
native

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 MeasureThat.net, where JavaScript microbenchmarks come to life.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two test cases: `lodash.each` vs `Object.forEach`. The benchmark measures the performance difference between using Lodash's `each` function versus the native JavaScript `forEach` method. Specifically, it tests the speed of the `difference` function from Lodash (`_difference(a, b)`).

**Options compared**

Two approaches are being tested:

1. **Lodash's `each` function**: This function is a part of the popular utility library Lodash. It's designed to iterate over an array and execute a callback function for each element.
2. **Native JavaScript `forEach` method**: This is a built-in method in JavaScript that allows you to iterate over an array and execute a callback function for each element.

**Pros and Cons**

**Lodash's `each` function:**

Pros:

* Often more convenient and readable, especially when dealing with complex iteration logic.
* May provide better support for asynchronous iterations or callbacks.

Cons:

* Typically slower than native JavaScript methods due to the overhead of a library.
* Requires an additional import, which can add to page load times.

**Native JavaScript `forEach` method:**

Pros:

* Generally faster than Lodash's `each` function due to the lack of library overhead.
* Built-in and always available, without requiring an additional import.

Cons:

* May require more boilerplate code or explicit handling of errors.
* Less readable or convenient for complex iteration logic.

**Library used: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and functional programming. In this case, the `each` function is used to iterate over an array and execute a callback function for each element.

**Special JS feature or syntax: None mentioned**

The benchmark doesn't use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require explanation beyond what's already covered.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative libraries or methods, here are some options:

* For faster array iteration: `Array.prototype.forEach` or `Array.prototype.map`
* For more functional programming style: Immutable.js or Ramda
* For a balance between convenience and performance: Underscore.js (another popular utility library)

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your specific use case, personal preference, and project requirements.

I hope this explanation helps!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/66.0.3359.139 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 66 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash.difference	1338971.6 Ops/sec
native	623447.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

lodash.each vs Object.forEach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.difference vs native

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.difference

native

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):