Benchmark: obj.ent vs forown

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var arrayValue = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}]
var objectValue = { a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494}

Tests:

forown
_.forOwn(objectValue, function(v,i) {})
for..in
for(var k in objectValue) { var v = objectValue[k]; }
obj.ent().foreach
Object.entries(objectValue).forEach(([key, val]) => {})

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
forown
for..in
obj.ent().foreach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to help understand what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark created on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three different approaches for iterating over an object:

1. `_.forOwn(objectValue, function(v,i) {})`: This uses the Lodash library's `forOwn` method.
2. `for(var k in objectValue) { var v = objectValue[k]; }`: This is a traditional `for...in` loop.
3. `Object.entries(objectValue).forEach(([key, val]) => {})`: This uses the `entries()` method of the `Object` prototype to iterate over an object's key-value pairs.

**Options Compared**

The three options are compared in terms of their execution speed. The goal is to determine which approach is the fastest for iterating over an object.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Lodash `.forOwn`**: This approach uses a library function that iterates over an object using its own implementation. Pros: optimized and efficient, since it's implemented in C++ by Mozilla. Cons: relies on the Lodash library, which adds extra overhead.
2. **Traditional `for...in` loop**: This approach uses a standard JavaScript construct for iterating over an object. Pros: widely supported and well-known, can be easily understood by most developers. Cons: slower than optimized implementations like `.forOwn`, since it's implemented in JavaScript.
3. **`Object.entries()` iteration**: This approach uses the `entries()` method of the `Object` prototype to iterate over an object's key-value pairs. Pros: fast and efficient, since it's implemented in C++ by Mozilla. Cons: requires modern JavaScript features (ES6+), which may not be supported by all browsers.

**Library Used**

The Lodash library is used in the first option (`_.forOwn(objectValue, function(v,i) {})`). It provides a set of utility functions for functional programming, including the `forOwn` method. The library is included via a CDN link (`https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js`) to simplify benchmarking.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None of the test cases rely on any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's required for iterating over an object. However, note that the `Object.entries()` iteration method was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6), so it may not be supported by older browsers or environments.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to create a similar benchmark using different approaches, here are some alternatives:

* Use other libraries like `forEach` or `for...of` loops instead of Lodash's `forOwn`.
* Compare the performance of iterating over an object using an array (`arrayValue`) versus an object (`objectValue`).
* Add additional complexity to the test cases by including more objects, arrays, or complex data structures.

By following this explanation, you should be able to create your own JavaScript microbenchmark and compare different approaches for iterating over an object.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/119.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 119 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
forown	7672744.0 Ops/sec
for..in	8023312.5 Ops/sec
obj.ent().foreach	9988789.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

obj.ent vs forown (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: forown vs for..in vs obj.ent().foreach

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

forown

for..in

obj.ent().foreach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):