Benchmark: Lodash werwer wer wevs array.prototype.sort

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}

var arr = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 100000; i++){
  arr.push({value:getRandomInt(100)});
}

Tests:

_.sortBy
_.sortBy(arr,"value");
array.prototype.sort
arr.sort((a, b) => { if (a.value > b.value) { return -1; } else if (a.value < b.value) { return 1; } else { return 0; } });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.sortBy
array.prototype.sort

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Context**

The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches: using the `Array.prototype.sort` method and using the Lodash library's `sortBy` function. Both methods are used to sort an array of objects in ascending order based on a specific property (in this case, the `value` property).

**Options Compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Array.prototype.sort**: This is a native JavaScript method that sorts the array in place using a stable sorting algorithm.
2. **Lodash library's sortBy function**: This function uses a more efficient sorting algorithm and provides additional features, such as the ability to specify a custom comparator function.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Array.prototype.sort**

Pros:

* Fast and lightweight
* No external dependencies required
* Native JavaScript implementation

Cons:

* Can be slower for large datasets due to its stability properties
* May not provide the same level of flexibility as Lodash's sortBy function

**Lodash library's sortBy function**

Pros:

* More efficient sorting algorithm
* Provides additional features, such as custom comparator functions
* Can handle large datasets more efficiently

Cons:

* External dependency on the Lodash library
* May introduce overhead due to the inclusion of the library

**Library Used (Lodash)**

The `sortBy` function from the Lodash library uses a modified merge sort algorithm, which is known for its efficiency and stability. The library provides additional features, such as the ability to specify a custom comparator function, which can help optimize the sorting process.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

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

**Other Alternatives**

Other alternatives to using `Array.prototype.sort` or Lodash's `sortBy` function include:

* Using other sorting algorithms, such as quicksort or heapsort
* Implementing a custom sorting algorithm from scratch
* Using a different library or framework that provides a similar sorting functionality

Some popular alternatives to Lodash include:

* Ramda: A functional programming library for JavaScript
* Underscore.js: Another popular functional programming library for JavaScript
* Sortable.js: A lightweight library specifically designed for sorting arrays

In summary, the benchmark measures the performance of two approaches: using the `Array.prototype.sort` method and using the Lodash library's `sortBy` function. The results provide insights into the relative efficiency and flexibility of these approaches, which can be useful for developers who need to optimize their code for large datasets or high-performance applications.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/71.0.3578.98 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 71 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
_.sortBy	12.8 Ops/sec
array.prototype.sort	498.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Lodash werwer wer wevs array.prototype.sort (version: 0)

sdf

Comparing performance of: _.sortBy vs array.prototype.sort

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

_.sortBy

array.prototype.sort

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):