Benchmark: CORRECTED: Filter-Map: Lodash vs Native

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = Array(1000000).fill({ filtering: true, mapping: 42 });

Tests:

Native filter-map
data.filter(({ filtering }) => filtering).map(({ mapping }) => mapping)
Lazy Lodash filter-map
_(data).filter('filtering').map('mapping').value()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native filter-map
Lazy Lodash filter-map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 25 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 131 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Native filter-map	7.4 Ops/sec
Lazy Lodash filter-map	5.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing two approaches for filtering and mapping data in JavaScript: using native functions versus using the `lodash` library.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates an array of 1,000,000 objects, each with two properties: `filtering` and `mapping`. This data will be used as input for the benchmark tests.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code includes a reference to the latest version of the `lodash` library (4.17.4) via a CDN link. This library is being tested against its native implementation.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Native filter-map**: This test case uses native JavaScript functions (`filter()` and `map()`) to process the data array.
2. **Lazy Lodash filter-map**: This test case uses the `lodash` library's `filter()` and `map()` functions, but with a lazy evaluation approach. The `_` prefix is used to access the `lodash` namespace.

**Libraries and Features**

* **Lodash**: A popular JavaScript utility library that provides a comprehensive set of functional programming helpers.
	+ In this benchmark, Lodash's `filter()` and `map()` functions are used with lazy evaluation (`_.filter()`, `_().filter('key')`, etc.).
* **Native JavaScript**: The built-in JavaScript language features `filter()` and `map()` functions.

**Pros and Cons**

**Native filter-map**

Pros:

* No dependencies on external libraries
* Fast execution, as native functions are optimized by the V8 engine

Cons:

* Requires manual handling of errors and edge cases
* May have performance differences due to the V8 engine's optimizations

**Lazy Lodash filter-map**

Pros:

* Easy to use with a familiar API (Lodash)
* Can avoid manual error handling and edge case management
* Can be more readable, as the code is often more concise

Cons:

* Requires an external dependency on the `lodash` library
* May have performance overhead due to the added complexity of lazy evaluation

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses a large dataset (1,000,000 objects) to ensure accurate results.
* The test cases are designed to measure execution speed and throughput.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring other approaches or alternatives for filtering and mapping data in JavaScript, here are some options:

* **ES6+**: You can use modern JavaScript features like `Array.prototype.filter()` and `Array.prototype.map()` directly, without relying on external libraries.
* **Other utility libraries**: Other popular JavaScript libraries like Ramda, Preact, or Immutable.js offer functional programming helpers that might be relevant for this benchmark.
* **Native alternatives**: Depending on the specific use case, you might find native implementations of filtering and mapping functions, such as `Array.prototype.filter()` or `Array.prototype.map()`, to be more suitable.

Related benchmarks:

CORRECTED: Filter-Map: Lodash vs Native (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native filter-map vs Lazy Lodash filter-map

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native filter-map

Lazy Lodash filter-map

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):