Benchmark: lodash some vs loop (static functions)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.2/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var sample = [1000, 1234, 1222, 3444, 1, 89, 100, 1200, 88888, 99999, 2000000];

for (var i = 1000000; i > 0; i--){
	if(i % 3 === 0){
      sample.push[i]
    }
}

function check(item) {
  return item === 55555;
}

function containsLodash(myList) {
    return _.some(myList, function myPredicateFn(listItem){
      return listItem === Math.floor(Math.random() * 99999);
    });
}

function containsSimple(myList, myItem) {
    for (var i = 0; i < myList.length; i++) {
        var contains = myItem === myList[i];
        if (contains) {
            return contains;
        }
    }
    return false;
}

Tests:

use lodash
containsLodash(sample)
use for loop
containsSimple(sample, Math.floor(Math.random() * 99999))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
use lodash
use for loop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

ⓘ Get performance results from real users on your website with Request Metrics.

Website Performance Monitoring by Request Metrics

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_12_5) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/60.0.3112.90 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 60 on Mac OS X 10.12.5

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
use lodash	170653.3 Ops/sec
use for loop	1312485.0 Ops/sec

lodash some vs loop (static functions) (version: 8)

Comparing performance of: use lodash vs use for loop

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

use lodash

use for loop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A