Run results for: Lodash vs Ramda

Run details:

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu Chromium/78.0.3904.97 Chrome/78.0.3904.97 Safari/537.36

Browser: Chromium 78

Operating system: Ubuntu

Device Platform: Desktop

Date tested: 4 years ago

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	543.4 Ops/sec
Ramda without relying on currying or composition	546.5 Ops/sec
Ramda with currying and composition	520.5 Ops/sec

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.4/lodash.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

  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) .map(item => item.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);

Run results for: Lodash vs Ramda

Lodash

Ramda without relying on currying or composition

Ramda with currying and composition