Benchmark: Lodash vs vanila 2

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}

function makeid(length) {
   var result           = '';
   var characters       = 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789';
   var charactersLength = characters.length;
   for ( var i = 0; i < length; i++ ) {
      result += characters.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * charactersLength));
   }
   return result;
}

var arr = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 100000; i++){
  arr.push({
    published: getRandomInt(100),
    title: makeid(20),
  });
}

Tests:

lodash
_.orderBy(arr, ['published', 'title'], ['desc', 'desc']);
sortBt
arr.sort((a, b) => { if (a.published > b.published) { return -1; } else if (a.published < b.published) { return 1; } return a.title.localeCompare(b.title); })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash
sortBt

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The website MeasureThat.net provides a JSON representation of a JavaScript microbenchmark. The benchmark compares two approaches for sorting an array of objects:

1. **Lodash**: Uses the `_.orderBy` function from the Lodash library.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript**: Implements a custom sort function using the `sort()` method and a compare function.

**Test Case 1: Lodash**

The first test case compares the execution speed of the Lodash `_.orderBy` function with vanilla JavaScript's `sort()` method.

**Pros:**

* Lodash provides a concise and readable way to sort arrays, making it easier for developers to maintain.
* The library handles edge cases and is well-maintained.

**Cons:**

* Adds an extra dependency (Lodash) and potential performance overhead due to the library's complexity.
* May not be suitable for small-scale or simple sorting tasks.

**Test Case 2: Vanilla JavaScript**

The second test case compares the execution speed of a custom sort function implemented using vanilla JavaScript's `sort()` method.

**Pros:**

* No dependencies, as it only uses built-in JavaScript functions.
* Can be optimized for specific use cases and performance requirements.

**Cons:**

* Requires more code and manual implementation, which can increase development time.
* May lead to complexity and maintenance issues if not implemented correctly.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of functional programming helpers. In this benchmark, `_.orderBy` is used to sort an array based on multiple criteria. The purpose of the `_.orderBy` function is to:

* Sort arrays based on one or more fields
* Support descending order (e.g., 'desc')
* Provide a concise and readable API

**Special JS Feature:**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives:**

For sorting arrays, developers can use other libraries like:

* Moment.js for date-based sorting
* FastSort for high-performance sorting
* jQuery's `sort()` method (for compatibility with older browsers)

However, MeasureThat.net focuses on comparing the performance of Lodash and vanilla JavaScript implementations.

In conclusion, this benchmark allows users to compare the execution speed of two approaches: Lodash and vanilla JavaScript. The results help developers understand which approach is more suitable for their specific use cases and performance requirements.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.192 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash	5.9 Ops/sec
sortBt	32.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Lodash vs vanila 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash vs sortBt

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash

sortBt

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):