<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>
const data = {
key: "abc"
}
R.values(data);
const data = {
key: "abc"
}
Object.values(data);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Ramda values | |
Object.values() |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Ramda values | 4537895.5 Ops/sec |
Object.values() | 5482040.0 Ops/sec |
I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in the provided benchmark.
The benchmark is comparing two approaches: using Ramda's R.values()
function and using JavaScript's built-in Object.values()
method.
Ramda's R.values()
Ramda is a functional programming library for JavaScript. It provides various functions for data manipulation, filtering, mapping, reducing, and more. In this case, R.values()
is used to extract all the values from an object. The purpose of using Ramda in this benchmark is likely to test its performance against the built-in JavaScript method.
JavaScript's Object.values()
This approach uses the built-in Object.values()
method to extract all the property values from an object. This is a relatively modern feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).
Now, let's discuss the pros and cons of each approach:
Ramda's R.values():
Pros:
Cons:
JavaScript's Object.values():
Pros:
Object.values()
method is implemented in native code, making it faster and more efficient than a library like Ramda.Cons:
Object.values()
without caution can lead to errors or unexpected behavior.The benchmark results show that the built-in Object.values()
method outperforms Ramda's R.values()
by a significant margin (approximately 20-25% better execution rate). This suggests that for simple cases like extracting values from objects, the native JavaScript method is a good choice. However, if you need more advanced data manipulation or filtering capabilities, Ramda might still be a viable option.
As for other alternatives, you could consider using:
and
Object.keys(): A combination of these two methods can achieve similar results to
Object.values()`, but with less concise syntax.Keep in mind that the choice ultimately depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.