Benchmark: Loop over object: lodash vs Object.entries fork by d9k 2

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var obj = Array.from({ length: 10000 }).map((value, i) => i).reduce((val, v) => { val[v] = v; return val; }, {})

Tests:

lodash.each
_.each(obj, function(v, k) {})
lodash.map
_.map(obj, function(v, k) {})
Object.entries.map
Object.entries(obj).map(function([k, v]) {})
Object.entries + for
const entries = Object.entries(obj); for (let i = 0; i < entries.length; i++) { const [k, v] = entries[i]; }
Object.entries + for of
for (let [k, v] of Object.entries(obj)) { // }
foreach
Object.keys(obj).forEach(function (k) { let v = obj[k]; // });
for..in
for (const k in obj) { if (obj.hasOwnProperty(k)) { let v = obj[k]; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.each
lodash.map
Object.entries.map
Object.entries + for
Object.entries + for of
foreach
for..in

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/80.0.3987.132 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 80 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash.each	2077.1 Ops/sec
lodash.map	1498.2 Ops/sec
Object.entries.map	654.5 Ops/sec
Object.entries + for	757.6 Ops/sec
Object.entries + for of	754.4 Ops/sec
foreach	579.9 Ops/sec
for..in	331.8 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 benchmark and its various components.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test is designed to compare the performance of different approaches for iterating over an object in JavaScript. The object in question is created using `Array.from` and populated with 10,000 properties.

**Test Cases**

There are six test cases:

1. **lodash.each**: Uses Lodash's `each` function to iterate over the object.
2. **lodash.map**: Uses Lodash's `map` function to transform each value in the object.
3. **Object.entries + for**: Iterates over the object using `Object.entries` and a traditional `for` loop.
4. **Object.entries + for of**: Iterates over the object using `Object.entries` and the `for...of` loop.
5. **foreach**: Uses the `forEach` method to iterate over the object.
6. **for..in**: Iterates over the object using the `for...in` loop.

**Library Used**

The test case "lodash.each" uses Lodash, a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for iterating and manipulating data.

**Special Features or Syntax**

None of the test cases use any special features or syntax beyond standard JavaScript.

**Approach Comparison**

Here's a brief overview of each approach:

* **Lodash**: Uses its `each` and `map` functions, which are optimized for performance. These functions work by creating an intermediate array and then iterating over it.
* **Object.entries + for**: Iterates directly over the object's properties using `Object.entries`. This approach is more efficient than using a traditional `for` loop or `forEach`.
* **Object.entries + for of**: Similar to the previous approach, but uses the `for...of` loop instead. This approach is also optimized and provides good performance.
* **foreach**: Uses the `forEach` method, which creates an intermediate array (in this case, the object itself). While not as efficient as the other approaches, it still provides decent performance.
* **for..in**: Iterates directly over the object's properties using the `for...in` loop. This approach is less efficient than the others because it doesn't skip over deleted or undefined properties.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

* **Lodash**:
	+ Pros: Optimized functions, easy to use.
	+ Cons: Adds external dependency (Lodash).
* **Object.entries + for**: Pros: Fast, efficient, doesn't create intermediate arrays. Cons: May be less readable than traditional loops.
* **Object.entries + for of**: Similar pros and cons to the previous approach.
* **foreach**: Pros: Easy to use, no dependencies required. Cons: Creates an intermediate array, may not be as fast as other approaches.
* **for..in**: Pros: Simple, minimal dependencies. Cons: Less efficient than other approaches.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

* **Using `forEach` with a custom function**: Instead of using the `forEach` method, you can create a custom function that iterates over the object's properties.
* **Using a traditional `for` loop**: You can use a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the object's properties, skipping deleted or undefined ones.
* **Using `Array.prototype.forEach.call()`:** This approach is similar to using `forEach`, but it uses a different method to achieve the same result.

I hope this helps you understand the benchmark and its various components!

Related benchmarks:

Loop over object: lodash vs Object.entries fork by d9k 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.each vs lodash.map vs Object.entries.map vs Object.entries + for vs Object.entries + for of vs foreach vs for..in

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

lodash.each

lodash.map

Object.entries.map

Object.entries + for

Object.entries + for of

foreach

for..in

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):