Benchmark: lodash.each vs Object.forEach

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var value = _.range(0, 1000)

Tests:

lodash.each
_.each(value, function(v,i) {})
native
value.forEach(function(v,i) {})
for loop
for (var i = 0; i < value.length; i++) { }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.each
native
for loop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; Pixel 4) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/84.0.4147.105 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 84 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash.each	54787.6 Ops/sec
native	686136.0 Ops/sec
for loop	8507.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript benchmark that tests three different approaches to iterate over an array: using `lodash.each`, `Object.forEach` (native JavaScript method), and a traditional `for` loop.

**Tested Options**

The benchmark compares the performance of these three options:

1. **`lodash.each`**: A utility function from the Lodash library, which provides a convenient way to iterate over arrays.
2. **`Object.forEach`**: A native JavaScript method that allows iterating over array elements using a callback function.
3. **Traditional `for` loop**: An explicit iteration approach using a loop variable.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **`lodash.each`**:
	* Pros: Convenient, easy to read, and maintainable code; Lodash is a well-maintained library with extensive documentation.
	* Cons: Adds an external dependency (Lodash), which may not be desirable for every project; slightly slower than native methods due to the overhead of the function call.
2. **`Object.forEach`**:
	* Pros: Native, efficient, and doesn't add any external dependencies. The callback function is also a common pattern in JavaScript development.
	* Cons: May require more code to set up the iteration; can be less readable than `lodash.each` for some developers.
3. **Traditional `for` loop**:
	* Pros: Most control over the iteration process, no dependencies or external libraries required. Can be more efficient than native methods in certain scenarios.
	* Cons: More verbose code, harder to read and maintain; may require more cognitive effort from the developer.

**Library Used: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for various tasks, including array manipulation (`lodash.each`), string manipulation, and more. In this benchmark, `lodash.each` is used as a convenience function to iterate over arrays, which is not native to JavaScript.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on the iteration approaches themselves, with no consideration for other aspects of JavaScript development.

**Other Alternatives**

For iterating over arrays, there are additional alternatives that could be considered:

1. **`forEach()`**: A modern JavaScript method introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6), which allows iterating over array elements using a callback function.
2. **`for...of` loop**: A more modern iteration approach introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) that provides a concise way to iterate over arrays and other iterable objects.

These alternatives are not tested in the provided benchmark, but they could be considered as potential alternatives depending on personal preference or specific use cases.

Related benchmarks:

lodash.each vs Object.forEach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.each vs native vs for loop

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.each

native

for loop

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):