Benchmark: Object.keys vs lodash _.forEach

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var value = {a: 30310, b: '100303', c: '3040494'}

Tests:

_.forEach
_.forEach(value,function(value,key){ return {value: _.camelCase(key), label: _.startCase(key)}} )
native with map
Object.keys(value).map( function(key){ return {value: _.camelCase(key), label: _.startCase(key)}} )
native with forEach
var arr = [] Object.keys(value).forEach( function(key){ return arr.push({value: _.camelCase(key), label: _.startCase(key)}) } )

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.forEach
native with map
native with forEach

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 provided JSON benchmark and explain what's being tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined in two parts:

1. The **Script Preparation Code**: This code defines an object `value` with three properties: `a`, `b`, and `c`. This object will be used as input for the benchmark.
2. The **Html Preparation Code**: This code includes a script tag that loads the Lodash library version 4.16.0 from a CDN. Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like string manipulation, array and object operations, and more.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of three test cases:

1. **_.forEach(value,function(value,key){ return {value: _.camelCase(key), label: _.startCase(key)}} )**: This test case uses the `_.forEach` function from Lodash to iterate over the properties of the `value` object and transform each key-value pair by converting the key to camelCase and prefixing it with an underscore. The resulting objects are collected in an array.
2. **Object.keys(value).map( function(key){ return {value: _.camelCase(key), label: _.startCase(key)}} )**: This test case uses the `Object.keys` function to get an array of the object's keys, maps over this array using the `Array.prototype.map()` method, and applies the same transformation as in the previous test case.
3. **var arr = []\r\nObject.keys(value).forEach( function(key){ return arr.push({value: _.camelCase(key), label: _.startCase(key)}) } )**: This test case is similar to the second one but uses a native `forEach` loop instead of `Array.prototype.map()`.

**Options Compared**

The three test cases compare different approaches for iterating over an object's properties and transforming them:

* **_.forEach(value,function(value,key){ return {value: _.camelCase(key), label: _.startCase(key)}} )**: Uses Lodash's `_.forEach` function to iterate.
* **Object.keys(value).map( function(key){ return {value: _.camelCase(key), label: _.startCase(key)}} )**: Uses `Array.prototype.map()` to transform the keys of the object.
* **var arr = []\r\nObject.keys(value).forEach( function(key){ return arr.push({value: _.camelCase(key), label: _.startCase(key)}) } )**: Uses a native `forEach` loop to iterate.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons for each approach:

* **_.forEach**: Pros: concise, readable code; Cons: requires Lodash library, might be slower due to function overhead.
* **Object.keys().map()**: Pros: more efficient than native `forEach` loop; Cons: requires using `Array.prototype.map()` which can add overhead, and uses a separate array for the result.
* **Native forEach**: Pros: most efficient way, no additional libraries required; Cons: might be less readable due to the use of an arrow function.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses Chrome 116 as the browser, but it would be interesting to see how the results compare across different browsers and versions.
* The `RawUAString` field in the latest benchmark result indicates the user agent string for each execution. This can provide additional information about the testing environment.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for this benchmark could include:

* Using a more efficient JavaScript engine or just-in-time compiler like V8 (used by Chrome)
* Comparing the performance of Lodash's `_.forEach` function with other alternatives like `Array.prototype.forEach()`
* Adding more test cases to cover different scenarios, such as using more complex objects or arrays
* Including additional metadata, like CPU usage or memory allocation, to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the benchmark results

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 116 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
_.forEach	653002.6 Ops/sec
native with map	664660.6 Ops/sec
native with forEach	636278.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Object.keys vs lodash _.forEach (version: 0)

Also checking the .map method on the returned array.

Comparing performance of: _.forEach vs native with map vs native with forEach

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.forEach

native with map

native with forEach

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):