MeasureThat.net

Run results for: Ramda vs. Lodash

Compares performance on the same task using Lodash vs two styles of Ramda vs two styles of "native" Javascript. In all cases the task is pulling "counter" property from each item in an array, filtering out odd items, squaring them, then returning those squared values that have less than two digits.

Go to the benchmark
Run details:
Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; CPU OS 10_3_3 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/603.3.8 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/10.0 Mobile/14G60 Safari/602.1
Mobile Safari 10
iOS 10.3.3
Tablet
5 years ago
Test name Executions per second
Lodash 13225.4 Ops/sec
Ramda without relying on currying or composition 57.0 Ops/sec
Ramda with currying and composition 46.7 Ops/sec
HTML Preparation code:
AخA
 
1
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>
2
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js"></script>
Script Preparation code:
​x
 
var data = _.range(10000).map(function(i) {
  return {
    counter: i
  }
});
​
function isOdd(num) {
  return num % 2 === 1;
}
​
function square(num) {
  return num * num;
}
​
function lessThanThreeDigits(num) {
  return num.toString().length < 3;
}
Tests:

  • Lodash

     
    var result = _.chain(data)
      .pick('counter')
      .filter(isOdd)
      .map(square)
      .filter(lessThanThreeDigits)
      .value();

  • Ramda without relying on currying or composition

     
    var result = R.filter(lessThanThreeDigits,
      R.map(square,
        R.filter(isOdd,
          R.pluck('counter', data))));

  • Ramda with currying and composition

     
    var result = R.pipe(
      R.pluck('counter'),
      R.filter(isOdd),
      R.map(square),
      R.filter(lessThanThreeDigits)
    )(data);