Benchmark: Quick transfer - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

function extractor(o) {
	const t = [];
  	for (var k in o) { o['k'] = k; t.push(o[k]); }
    return t;
}

Tests:

Object.values()
var a = {a: {z:1}, b: {z:1}, c: {z:1}, d: {z:1}, e: {z:1}, f: {z:1}, g: {z:1}, h: {z:1}, i: {z:1}, j: {z:1}}; Object.values(a);
Lodash
var a = {a: {z:1}, b: {z:1}, c: {z:1}, d: {z:1}, e: {z:1}, f: {z:1}, g: {z:1}, h: {z:1}, i: {z:1}, j: {z:1}}; _.values(a);
Custom function
var a = {a: {z:1}, b: {z:1}, c: {z:1}, d: {z:1}, e: {z:1}, f: {z:1}, g: {z:1}, h: {z:1}, i: {z:1}, j: {z:1}}; extractor(a);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Object.values()
Lodash
Custom function

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 its results for you.

**Benchmark Definition**

The test measures which method is faster: using `Object.values()`, using a custom function `extractor()`, or using the `_.values()` method from the Lodash library.

**Options Compared**

There are three options compared:

1. **`Object.values()`**: This is a built-in JavaScript method that returns an array of a given object's own enumerable property values.
2. **Custom Function `extractor()`**: This custom function, defined in the "Script Preparation Code" section of the benchmark definition, pushes each key-value pair from the input object into a new array using a for...in loop.
3. **Lodash `.values()` method**: This is a utility function provided by the Lodash library that returns an array of values from an object.

**Pros and Cons**

* **`Object.values()`**:
	+ Pros: Fast, lightweight, and easy to use.
	+ Cons: May not be as flexible or customizable as other options.
* **Custom Function `extractor()`**:
	+ Pros: Customizable, can be optimized for specific use cases, and may be faster than `Object.values()` in certain scenarios.
	+ Cons: Requires more code and effort to write and maintain, can be slower due to the additional function call and loop overhead.
* **Lodash `.values()` method**:
	+ Pros: Fast, convenient, and provides additional utility methods for working with arrays.
	+ Cons: Requires including an external library, may add unnecessary overhead.

**Library and Its Purpose**

The Lodash library is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, object transformation, and functional programming. In this benchmark, the `.values()` method from Lodash is used to extract values from an object, but it's not strictly necessary since `Object.values()` can be used instead.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided information.

**Other Alternatives**

If `Object.values()` is too slow, another alternative could be using a library like Ramda, which provides a similar `.values()` method. Alternatively, a custom implementation using a for...in loop and an array can also be used.

Keep in mind that the performance difference between these options may not be significant in all scenarios, and other factors such as memory usage, cache hits, or specific hardware characteristics may also influence the results.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/78.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 78 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Object.values()	2699803.2 Ops/sec
Lodash	1176115.0 Ops/sec
Custom function	1563910.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Quick transfer (version: 0)

Object.values() faster? Let's see.

Comparing performance of: Object.values() vs Lodash vs Custom function

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Object.values()

Lodash

Custom function

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):