Benchmark: native find vs lodash _.find..

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.11/lodash.core.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var users = [
    1, 2, 3
]

Tests:

array find
// Native users.find(function (o) { return o == 3; })
_.find
_.find(users, function (o) { return o==3; })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array find
_.find

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and considered.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for finding an element in an array:

1. Native JavaScript (using `Array.prototype.find()` method)
2. Using Lodash library (`_.find()` method)

The benchmark aims to determine which approach is faster and more efficient.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Native JavaScript**: Uses the built-in `Array.prototype.find()` method, which is a part of the ECMAScript standard.
2. **Lodash `.find()` method**: Uses the Lodash library's implementation of the `_.find()` function.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Native JavaScript (Array.prototype.find())**
	+ Pros:
		- Built-in method, no additional library dependencies required
		- Typically faster since it's implemented in native code
		- Simplifies code by using a standard method for array traversal
	+ Cons:
		- May have performance issues if not properly optimized or used incorrectly
* **Lodash `.find()` method**
	+ Pros:
		- Lodash is a widely-used and well-maintained library with extensive documentation
		- Can be useful when working with complex data structures or algorithms that require more functionality than `Array.prototype.find()`
	+ Cons:
		- Adds an additional dependency to the project, which may increase bundle size or dependencies management complexity

**Library Used (Lodash)**

The Lodash library is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for various tasks, such as:

* Array manipulation and filtering
* String manipulation and formatting
* Object manipulation and merging
* Functional programming utilities

In this benchmark, the `_.find()` function is used to find an element in the `users` array.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned in this benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript syntax and features, including ES6 spread operator (`var users = [...];`) and the `==` operator for comparison.

**Other Alternatives**

Alternative approaches to finding an element in an array include:

* Using a traditional loop with `for` or `forEach` statements
* Using other libraries like Ramda or Underscore.js (other popular utility libraries)
* Implementing your own custom function using recursion or iteration

However, the Lodash `.find()` method and native JavaScript's `Array.prototype.find()` method are two of the most common and efficient approaches for finding an element in an array.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_5) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/83.0.4103.116 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 83 on Mac OS X 10.15.5

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
array find	6929944.5 Ops/sec
_.find	1668059.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

native find vs lodash _.find.. (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: array find vs _.find

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array find

_.find

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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