Benchmark: divyansh - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var person = {name: 'Frederick', lastName: 'Corcino Alejo'};

Tests:

loadash get
_.get(person, 'name');
normal
person['name']

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
loadash get
normal

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 Definition JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition consists of two main parts:

1. **Script Preparation Code**: This is the JavaScript code that sets up the environment for the benchmark. In this case, it creates a simple object `person` with properties `name` and `lastName`.
2. **Html Preparation Code**: This is the HTML code that includes a reference to an external library, Lodash (a popular utility library). The library is loaded from a CDN (Content Delivery Network).

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark defines two individual test cases:

1. **loadash get**: This test case runs the `_.get()` method on the `person` object, accessing the `name` property.
2. **normal**: This test case uses direct property access (`person['name']`) to access the `name` property.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. Using Lodash's `_get()` method: This method allows you to dynamically access nested properties in an object. In this case, it's used to access the `name` property of the `person` object.
2. Direct property access (`person['name']`): This is a simple and straightforward way to access the `name` property.

**Pros and Cons**

Using Lodash's `_get()` method has several advantages:

* **Flexibility**: You can use it to access nested properties with ease, without having to write separate functions for each combination of properties.
* **Code reusability**: If you need to access multiple nested properties, you only need to write the `_get()` method once.

However, there are also some drawbacks:

* **Performance overhead**: Using a library like Lodash can introduce additional overhead due to the indirection and function calls.
* **Dependency**: You need to include the Lodash library in your benchmark codebase, which may not be desirable for smaller projects or those with strict dependencies.

On the other hand, direct property access (`person['name']`) is:

* **Fast**: Since it's a simple property lookup, it's usually the fastest way to access an object's properties.
* **No dependencies**: You don't need to include any additional libraries or code.

However, this approach also has some limitations:

* **Limited flexibility**: If you need to access nested properties, you'll have to write separate functions for each combination of properties.
* **Code duplication**: If you need to access multiple nested properties, you may end up duplicating code.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions and helpers for tasks such as:

* String manipulation
* Array manipulation
* Object manipulation (including `_get()` method)
* Functional programming

The purpose of using Lodash in this benchmark is to test the performance difference between direct property access and using the `_get()` method. It also allows us to compare the performance of two different approaches in a controlled environment.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being used in these benchmarks.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to benchmark other alternatives, here are some options:

* Using another utility library, such as Ramda or Lisk.
* Implementing your own `_get()` method using a loop and string concatenation.
* Using a different approach, such as accessing the `name` property of an object using a regex or a function call.

However, these alternatives might not provide the same level of flexibility, code reusability, or performance compared to Lodash's `_get()` method.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/100.0.4896.127 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 100 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
loadash get	4019995.0 Ops/sec
normal	15788643.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

divyansh (version: 0)

div

Comparing performance of: loadash get vs normal

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

loadash get

normal

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):