<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/g/lodash@4(lodash.min.js+lodash.fp.min.js)'></script>
var fp = _.noConflict();
var fp = _.noConflict();
var array = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'g', 'h', 'i', 'j', 'k', 'l', 'm', 'n', 'o', 'p', 'q', 'r', 's', 't', 'u', 'v', 'w', 'x', 'y', 'z'];
var reducer = (r, x) => r + x;
array.reduce(reducer, '');
_.reduce(array, reducer, '');
fp.reduce(reducer, '', array);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Native | |
Lodash | |
Lodash FP |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Native | 5046794.5 Ops/sec |
Lodash | 3730402.8 Ops/sec |
Lodash FP | 2001135.8 Ops/sec |
Overview
The provided JSON represents a benchmark test comparing the performance of three approaches: native JavaScript, Lodash (a popular utility library), and Lodash's functional programming (FP) variant.
Benchmark Definition and Options Compared
The benchmark definition is defined by the Script Preparation Code
section in the main JSON object. The options compared are:
Array.prototype.reduce()
._reduce()
function from Lodash, which wraps the native JavaScript implementation._reduce()
function that uses functional programming principles, created by setting _noConflict()
to return a new version of the function, ensuring that it does not interfere with the native JavaScript Array.prototype.reduce()
method.Pros and Cons of Each Approach
Library and Purpose
Lodash is a popular utility library that provides a set of helper functions to simplify common tasks in JavaScript. The _.reduce()
function is part of this library and wraps the native JavaScript implementation.
Special JS Feature or Syntax
There is no explicit mention of any special JavaScript feature or syntax being used in the benchmark code. However, Lodash's functional programming variant uses a different approach to reduce functions, which may be unfamiliar to some developers.
Other Alternatives
If you were to rewrite this benchmark using alternative libraries or approaches, you might consider:
Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark code and may not provide the same level of comparison as the original implementation.