Benchmark: Lodash Get vs Native JS - TBT

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var newsletters = {
    newsletter_image: "test.jpg",
    newsletter_id: "15",
    newsletter_show_on_section_front: "true",
    newsletter_show_on_article: "false",
    newsletter_headline: "Test Headline"
}

Tests:

Lodash
_.get(newsletters, "newsletter_image")
Native
newsletters && newsletters.newsletter_image ? newsletters.newsletter_image : null;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing two ways to access a nested property in an object: using the Lodash library (`_.get()`) versus native JavaScript.

**Script Preparation Code**

This code defines an object `newsletters` with several properties:
```javascript
var newsletters = {
  newsletter_image: "test.jpg",
  newsletter_id: "15",
  newsletter_show_on_section_front: "true",
  newsletter_show_on_article: "false",
  newsletter_headline: "Test Headline"
};
```
**Html Preparation Code**

This code includes the Lodash library (`lodash.min.js`) from a CDN:
```html
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
```
**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. `_.get(newsletters, "newsletter_image")`: This uses the Lodash library to access the `newsletter_image` property of the `newsletters` object.
2. `newsletters && newsletters.newsletter_image ? newsletters.newsletter_image : null;`: This is a native JavaScript way to access the same property.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Lodash (`_.get()`)**
	* Pros:
		+ Provides a more explicit and readable way to access nested properties.
		+ Can handle cases where the property path is dynamic.
	* Cons:
		+ Adds extra overhead due to the library itself.
		+ May have slower execution compared to native JavaScript.
2. **Native JavaScript**
	* Pros:
		+ Faster execution, as it doesn't involve additional library overhead.
		+ Built-in optimization for common use cases.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be less readable and more error-prone due to the lack of explicitness.

**Other Considerations**

In general, Lodash is useful when:

* You need to handle complex or dynamic property paths.
* You want a more explicit and readable way to access nested properties.

On the other hand, native JavaScript is preferred when:

* Speed is critical, and every millisecond counts.
* The property path is simple and well-known.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other alternatives for accessing nested properties include:

* Using bracket notation (`newsletters["newsletter_image"]`): This is similar to the native JavaScript approach but uses an array-like syntax instead of a conditional statement.
* Using a recursive function: You could write your own recursive function to access nested properties. However, this would likely be slower and more verbose than either Lodash or native JavaScript.

Overall, the choice between Lodash and native JavaScript for accessing nested properties depends on your specific use case and performance requirements.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:89.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/89.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 89 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	11060895.0 Ops/sec
Native	264551232.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Lodash Get vs Native JS - TBT (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Native

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Native

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):