Benchmark: Array.prototype.every vs Lodash every()

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var array = [...Array(100000).keys()];
var ram = Math.floor(100000 * Math.random());

Tests:

Array.prototype.every
array.every(n => n === ram)
Lodash every
_.every(array,n => n === ram)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.every
Lodash every

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/129.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 129 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.every	8798461.0 Ops/sec
Lodash every	4541157.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares the performance of `Array.prototype.every()` and Lodash's `every()` function. The purpose of this comparison is to determine which function is faster for a specific scenario: checking if all elements in an array equal a certain value (`ram`).

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Array.prototype.every()**: This method checks if all elements in the array pass the provided test. In this case, the test is to check if each element equals `ram`.
2. **Lodash every()**: This function performs the same check as `Array.prototype.every()` but is a part of the Lodash library.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **Array.prototype.every()**:
    *   **Pros:**
        +   Part of the built-in JavaScript API, which means it's lightweight and doesn't require any additional libraries.
        +   Can be useful in certain scenarios where you want to perform a similar check on arrays.
    *   **Cons:**
        +   May have slower performance compared to Lodash's `every()` function due to its implementation details.
        +   May not be as flexible or powerful as Lodash's `every()`.
*   **Lodash every()**:
    *   **Pros:**
        +   More flexible and powerful than `Array.prototype.every()`, allowing for more complex tests.
        +   Often implemented in a way that provides better performance compared to the built-in method.
    *   **Cons:**
        +   Requires an additional library (Lodash), which may add overhead depending on your project's size or requirements.

**Library and Purpose**

The Lodash library is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various helper functions, including `every()`. The purpose of the `every()` function in Lodash is to check if all elements in an array pass a certain test. In this case, it's used to compare its performance with the built-in `Array.prototype.every()` method.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

This benchmark doesn't use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require specific knowledge of those topics. It only focuses on comparing the performance of two different methods for a simple array check.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative methods to compare all elements in an array, you could also consider:

*   Using `Array.prototype.every()` with a custom callback function.
*   Implementing your own loop-based solution to check all elements in the array.
*   Utilizing other libraries like Ramda or Liskelmur that provide similar functions to Lodash's `every()`.

However, for most use cases, using `Array.prototype.every()` and/or Lodash's `every()` function will be sufficient and performant enough.

Related benchmarks:

Array.prototype.every vs Lodash every() (version: 0)

comparing performance of Array.prototype.every vs Lodash every()

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype.every vs Lodash every

Created: 2 months ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.every

Lodash every

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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