Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

Benchmark Overview

The provided JSON represents two test cases, elements.every and _.every, which are variations of a microbenchmarking test. The goal is to compare the performance differences between using a vanilla JavaScript function (elements.every) versus a utility library function (_.). Let's break down what each part does:

Script Preparation Code

The script preparation code is a simple JavaScript snippet that defines an array elements containing three strings: "cat", "dog", and "bat". This code is executed before running the benchmark.

Html Preparation Code

The HTML preparation code includes a link to load the Lodash library (version 4.17.11) from a CDN. Lodash is a popular utility library for functional programming in JavaScript. It provides various functions, including every, which is used in one of our test cases.

Benchmark Test Cases

There are two individual test cases:

1. _.every(elements, el => el.length == 3): This test case uses the Lodash library to call the every function on the elements array. The callback function checks if each element's length is equal to 3.
2. elements.every(el => el.length == 3): This test case calls the every function directly on the elements array, without using Lodash.

Options Compared

In this benchmark, two options are being compared:

• Using the Lodash library (_.every)
• Not using a utility library (elements.every)

Pros and Cons

Using Lodash (_.every) offers several benefits:

Pros:

• Simplifies code: _.every makes it easy to write functional programming code.
• Performance: Modern browsers have optimized JavaScript engines that can handle the overhead of function calls, making Lodash a good choice for performance-critical code.

Cons:

• Adds dependency: Using an external library adds an extra dependency and potential maintenance burden.
• Potential overhead: Even with modern engines, there might be some overhead due to function call and garbage collection.

Not using Lodash (elements.every) offers the following benefits:

Pros:

• No additional dependencies
• Lightweight implementation

Cons:

• More verbose code
• Potential performance issues if not optimized correctly

Other Considerations

Keep in mind that the results of this benchmark might depend on specific use cases, such as:

• Array size and data distribution
• Performance-critical sections of code
• Additional optimizations or workarounds

Special JavaScript Features

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these test cases. The code is standard vanilla JavaScript.

Alternatives

Other alternatives for implementing the every function include:

• Writing a custom implementation from scratch.
• Using another utility library, such as Lo-Dash or Ramda.
• Leveraging modern JavaScript features like reduce() and iterating over arrays directly.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might have their own trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and maintainability.