Benchmark: sort variants test

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));
}

var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
    arr.push({
        value: getRandomInt(100)
    });
}

Tests:

_.sortBy
arr = _.sortBy(arr,"value");
native sort
arr = arr.sort((a,b) => a.value > b.value);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.sortBy
native sort

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/111.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/111.0.1661.62

Browser/OS: Chrome 111 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
_.sortBy	53.9 Ops/sec
native sort	192.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of different sorting algorithms is crucial in understanding their efficiency and limitations.

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test that compares two sorting variants: native JavaScript sort and _.sortBy from Lodash.

**Native JavaScript Sort:**

The native JavaScript `sort()` function sorts the array elements based on the specified comparison function. In this case, it uses a custom comparator function `(a, b) => a.value > b.value` to compare the "value" property of each object in the array.

**Pros and Cons:**

Pros:

* Native JavaScript sort is implemented in C++ under the hood, which makes it faster than JavaScript's V8 engine.
* It's a widely supported and well-established algorithm with good performance on most modern systems.
* No additional dependencies are required, as it's part of the standard JavaScript library.

Cons:

* The comparison function needs to be specified explicitly, which can add complexity to the code.
* The native JavaScript sort is not as flexible as _.sortBy, as it only works with arrays and requires a custom comparator function.

**_.sortBy from Lodash:**

_.sortBy is a utility function from the Lodash library that sorts an array based on a specified key. In this case, it's used to sort the `arr` array by the "value" property of each object.

**Pros and Cons:**

Pros:

* _.sortBy provides a more convenient and flexible way to sort arrays, as it doesn't require a custom comparison function.
* It works with various data structures, including arrays, objects, and nested arrays.
* Lodash is a widely used library with good performance and maintainability.

Cons:

* Requires an additional dependency (Lodash) to be included in the project.
* The performance might be slightly slower compared to native JavaScript sort due to the overhead of the Lodash function call.

**Other Considerations:**

* Both approaches have their strengths and weaknesses. Native JavaScript sort is faster but less flexible, while _.sortBy provides more convenience but might incur a slight performance penalty.
* When choosing between these two options, consider factors like project complexity, code readability, and performance requirements.

**Alternative Approaches:**

If you need to implement sorting in other languages or libraries, here are some alternatives:

1. **Java 8 Streams:** For Java applications, the `Stream.sort()` method can be used to sort arrays.
2. **Python's built-in sort():** Python has a built-in `sort()` function that can be used to sort lists.
3. **C++ algorithms (e.g., std::sort):** If you're working with C++ projects, consider using the standard library's sorting functions, such as `std::sort()`.
4. **Library-specific sorting functions:** Depending on your project requirements, other libraries or frameworks might provide their own sorting functions that can be used instead of native JavaScript sort or _.sortBy.

Keep in mind that each approach has its strengths and weaknesses, and the choice ultimately depends on your specific use case, project constraints, and personal preferences.

Related benchmarks:

sort variants test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.sortBy vs native sort

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.sortBy

native sort

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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