Benchmark: Lodash.get vs native with optional chaining

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

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

Tests:

Lodash get
_.get(person, 'name.firstName'); _.get(person, 'name.nothing');
Native
person.name.firstName person.name?.nothing

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: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/117.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 117 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash get	1264902.5 Ops/sec
Native	8134137.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

This benchmark compares the performance of two approaches for accessing nested properties in a JavaScript object:

**1. Lodash's `_.get()`:** This function from the Lodash library is designed to safely access deeply nested properties in objects. It returns the value at the specified path, or a default value if the path doesn't exist.

* **Pros:**
      - Safe and predictable: Handles missing paths gracefully without throwing errors.
      - Versatile: Can handle complex nested paths with multiple levels.

* **Cons:**
      - Adds a dependency on Lodash library.
      - Can be slightly slower than native options in simple cases.

**2. Native JavaScript with Optional Chaining (`?.`)**: Introduced in ES2020, optional chaining provides a concise and elegant way to access nested properties while preventing errors when paths are missing. It returns `undefined` if any property along the path is `undefined`.

* **Pros:**
      - No external dependencies: Built-in to modern JavaScript.
      - Concise syntax: More readable for simple chains.
      - Often faster than Lodash in basic scenarios.

* **Cons:**
      - Limited to ES2020+ environments: May not work in older browsers.

**Benchmark Results:** The benchmark results show that native optional chaining (`?.`) is significantly faster (6.5 times) than Lodash's `_.get()` for this specific use case. However, keep in mind that performance can vary depending on the complexity of the object structure and the number of properties being accessed.

**Alternatives:**
 -  If compatibility with older browsers is crucial, you might consider using a polyfill for optional chaining or explore other libraries like Ramda which offer similar functionality.

Let me know if you have any more questions!

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.get vs native with optional chaining (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash get vs Native

Created: one year 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 gemma2:9b, generated 2 months ago):