Benchmark: Optional Chaining versus _.get Lodash

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {a: {b: {c: {d: 1}}}}

Tests:

Optional Chaining
obj == null ? undefined : obj.a == null ? undefined : obj.a.b == null ? undefined : obj.a.b.c == null ? undefined : obj.a.b.c.d
Lodash
_.get(obj, "a.b.c.d")

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Optional Chaining
Lodash

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark compares two approaches to access nested properties in an object: Optional Chaining (also known as nullish coalescing) and Lodash's `_.get()` function.

**Optional Chaining vs. _.get Lodash**

Optional Chaining is a JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2020 that allows you to safely navigate objects without worrying about null or undefined references. It's denoted by the triple dot operator (`...`) followed by a chain of property accesses, like this: `obj?.a?.b?.c?.d`.

Lodash's `_.get()` function is a utility function that also navigates nested properties in an object, but it uses a different syntax. The basic idea is to provide a default value if any part of the navigation fails.

**Pros and Cons**

Optional Chaining:

Pros:

* More concise and expressive way to navigate objects
* Less chance of errors due to null or undefined references

Cons:

* Not all browsers support it yet (older versions of Chrome, Safari, etc.)
* May not be as flexible as Lodash's `_.get()` function

Lodash's `_.get()` function:

Pros:

* More widely supported by older browsers
* Provides more control over the default values used in case of navigation failures

Cons:

* Less concise and less expressive syntax
* May require more lines of code to achieve the same result as Optional Chaining

**Other Considerations**

Another approach that could be considered is using `in` operator or bracket notation (`obj["a"]["b"]["c"]["d"]`) to access nested properties. However, these methods are generally less concise and less expressive than Optional Chaining or Lodash's `_.get()` function.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript library that provides a wide range of utility functions for tasks like string manipulation, array processing, and object navigation. The `_.get()` function is one of its most useful tools for navigating nested properties in objects.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

Optional Chaining (nullish coalescing) is a relatively new feature introduced in ECMAScript 2020. It's not yet supported by all browsers, which is why the benchmark compares it to Lodash's `_.get()` function, which has wider support.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/85.0.4183.83 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 85 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Optional Chaining	1555828.5 Ops/sec
Lodash	1704474.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Optional Chaining versus _.get Lodash (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Optional Chaining vs Lodash

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Optional Chaining

Lodash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):