Benchmark: Lodash.get vs Property dot notation

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:

Lodash get
_.get(person, 'name');
Native
person.name

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash get
Native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/17.6 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 17 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash get	37194188.0 Ops/sec
Native	495240128.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON benchmark definition and test cases to understand what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches:

1. `_.get(person, 'name');` using Lodash
2. `person.name`

These two approaches are used to access a property (`"name"` in this case) of an object (`person`).

**Options Compared:**

The options being compared are:

* Using Lodash's `_.get()` method with two arguments (the object and the path to the desired property)
* Directly accessing the property using dot notation (`person.name`)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **Lodash's `_.get()` method:**
	* Pros:
		+ Can handle nested properties and is more flexible than direct dot notation.
		+ Reduces the risk of typos or incorrect property names.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires an external library (Lodash) to be loaded, which may add overhead.
		+ May introduce additional processing time due to the extra function call.
2. **Direct Dot Notation (`person.name`):**
	* Pros:
		+ Faster and more lightweight than using `_.get()`, as it only involves a simple property access.
	* Cons:
		+ Less flexible, as it's limited to accessing properties directly on an object.

**Other Considerations:**

* The benchmark is run in a browser environment (Chrome 128) with a Windows desktop device. This may affect the results due to differences in rendering engines or hardware capabilities.
* The test uses Lodash version 4.16.0, which may impact performance due to optimizations or changes made since then.

**Library:**

In this benchmark, Lodash is used as a utility library for accessing nested properties with the `_.get()` method. This allows for more flexibility and reduces the risk of typos, making it easier to write maintainable code.

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these test cases.

**Alternatives:**

If you prefer not to use Lodash, other alternatives for accessing nested properties include:

* Using a library like `lodash-es` (ES version) which is optimized for ES module systems
* Implementing your own utility function for accessing nested properties
* Using a different JavaScript library or framework that provides similar functionality, such as React's `useCallback` and `useMemo`

Keep in mind that the best approach will depend on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preferences.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.get vs Property dot notation (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash get vs Native

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash get

Native

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):