Benchmark: lodash.forOwn vs for..in

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var arrayValue = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}]
var objectValue = { a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494}

Tests:

lodash.each
_.forOwn(objectValue, function(v,i) {})
native
for(var k in objectValue) { var v = objectValue[k]; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.each
native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches for iterating over an object: `_.forOwn` from Lodash and the native `for...in` loop. The test case uses two JavaScript objects, `arrayValue` and `objectValue`, which contain similar properties with different values.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Lodash's `_forOwn` method**: This is a utility function that iterates over an object using a provided callback function. It's designed to iterate over the keys of the object, not its values.
2. **Native `for...in` loop**: This is a built-in JavaScript syntax for iterating over the properties of an object.

**Pros and Cons**

**Lodash's `_forOwn` method**

Pros:

* Well-tested and widely used, making it a reliable choice
* Provides a convenient way to iterate over objects without worrying about key order

Cons:

* Requires Lodash library inclusion, which can add extra overhead
* May not be the best choice for very large or sparse datasets due to its performance characteristics

**Native `for...in` loop**

Pros:

* Fast and efficient, as it's a built-in JavaScript syntax
* Does not require any external libraries

Cons:

* Can be slower than Lodash's `_forOwn` method for some scenarios (more on this later)
* May have issues with key order or undefined values, depending on the use case

**Other Considerations**

The test case uses `_.forOwn` and `for...in` loops to iterate over an object. The Lodash library is included in the HTML preparation code, making it a self-contained test.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark that require explanation.

**Library Used**

Lodash (specifically, its `forOwn` method) is used in this benchmark. The purpose of Lodash is to provide a set of utility functions that make common programming tasks easier. In this case, the `_forOwn` method provides a convenient way to iterate over objects without worrying about key order.

**Benchmark Test Case**

The test cases are:

1. `lodash.each`: This test case uses the Lodash `_forOwn` method to iterate over an object.
2. `native`: This test case uses the native `for...in` loop to iterate over an object.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other alternative approaches for iterating over objects include:

* Using `Object.keys()` and `forEach()`
* Using a simple `for...of` loop (not applicable in this benchmark, as it's using `for...in`)
* Using a library like `loop-queue` or `async-map`

Keep in mind that the best approach depends on the specific use case and performance requirements.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash.each	4767141.5 Ops/sec
native	3317428.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

lodash.forOwn vs for..in (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.each vs native

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.each

native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):