Benchmark: filter vs compact w/ no op

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var ops = [null, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, null, null, null, 3, 4,5, 6, 34,341,2,2,2,1,212,21212,34,1,3112, null, undefined, undefined, 0.0,0, 100, 1000];

Tests:

lodash filter
_.filter(ops, op => !!op)
lodash compact
_.compact(ops)
Native filter
ops.filter(op => !!op)
Native filter (no op)
ops.filter(op => op !== false)
lodash filter (no op)
_.filter(ops, op => op !== false)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash filter
lodash compact
Native filter
Native filter (no op)
lodash filter (no op)

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a benchmarking test created on MeasureThat.net, which compares the performance of two approaches to filter an array of numbers: using Lodash's `compact` function and using a native JavaScript implementation.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code provides an array of numbers (`ops`) that will be used as input for the filtering operations:
```javascript
var ops = [null, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, null, null, null, 3, 4,5, 6, 34,341,2,2,2,1,212,21212,34,1,3112, null, undefined, undefined, 0.0,0, 100, 1000];
```
This array contains a mix of numbers and non-numbers (null, undefined) to simulate real-world data.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code includes a script tag that loads the Lodash library:
```html
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>
```
This ensures that the Lodash functions are available for use in the benchmarking test.

**Individual Test Cases**

The test cases compare two approaches to filter the `ops` array:

1. **Lodash's `compact` function**: `_.compact(ops)`
2. **Native JavaScript implementation**: `ops.filter(op => !!op)`
3. **Native JavaScript implementation (no op)**: `ops.filter(op => op !== false)`
4. **Lodash's `filter` function (with no operation)**: `_.filter(ops, op => op !== false)`

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

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

1. **Lodash's `compact` function**:
	* Pros: Easy to use, efficient, and well-maintained.
	* Cons: Requires an external library (Lodash), may not be optimal for large arrays.
2. **Native JavaScript implementation**: `ops.filter(op => !!op)`
	* Pros: Fast, lightweight, and does not require an external library.
	* Cons: May have performance issues for very large arrays or edge cases.
3. **Native JavaScript implementation (no op)**: `ops.filter(op => op !== false)`
	* Pros: Similar to the previous approach but with a more efficient filtering condition.
	* Cons: Still may not be optimal for very large arrays or edge cases.
4. **Lodash's `filter` function (with no operation)**: `_.filter(ops, op => op !== false)`
	* Pros: Easy to use and similar to the Lodash `compact` function.
	* Cons: Requires an external library (Lodash), may not be optimal for large arrays.

**Other Considerations**

When comparing these approaches, consider the following factors:

* **Array size**: For very large arrays, optimized native implementations might perform better.
* **Edge cases**: Special handling of edge cases like `null` or `undefined` values can significantly impact performance.
* **Library overhead**: Using external libraries like Lodash may introduce additional overhead, which can affect performance.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to filtering arrays in JavaScript, consider:

1. **Array.prototype.filter()**: The built-in `filter()` method is a good alternative to the native implementation.
2. **Underscore.js functions**: Other popular utility libraries like Underscore.js offer similar functionality to Lodash.

In conclusion, when choosing an approach to filter an array in JavaScript, consider your specific use case, the size of the array, and any edge cases that may be present. The native JavaScript implementation with a simple filtering condition might be a good starting point, but optimizations like using `ops.filter(op => op !== false)` or leveraging built-in methods can further improve performance.

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/107.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 107 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash filter	809646.0 Ops/sec
lodash compact	1563206.0 Ops/sec
Native filter	2356425.2 Ops/sec
Native filter (no op)	3558467.8 Ops/sec
lodash filter (no op)	819700.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

filter vs compact w/ no op (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash filter vs lodash compact vs Native filter vs Native filter (no op) vs lodash filter (no op)

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash filter

lodash compact

Native filter

Native filter (no op)

lodash filter (no op)

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):