Benchmark: merge vs mergeWith params

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Tests:

lodash merge
var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my', d: 'ss' }; var b = { c: 'goddess', d: 's2s' }; var c = _.merge(a, b); console.log('merge', c)
lodash mergeWith
const mergeFunc = (obj, source) => { return obj ? obj : source; }; var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my', d: 'ss', non: "baseValue" }; var b = { c: 'goddess', d: 's2s', non: false, }; var c = _.mergeWith(a, b); console.log('mergeWith', c, mergeFunc)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash merge
lodash mergeWith

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 123 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash merge	298912.6 Ops/sec
lodash mergeWith	256873.3 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros/cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined in JSON format, which includes:

* `Name`: A descriptive name for the benchmark.
* `Description`: An optional description of the benchmark (not filled in this case).
* `Script Preparation Code`: An optional code snippet to prepare the JavaScript environment before running the test cases (empty in this case).
* `Html Preparation Code`: An HTML snippet that includes a script tag referencing the Lodash library version 4.17.5.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **`lodash merge`**
	* The benchmark definition is a JavaScript code snippet that creates two objects, `a` and `b`, merges them using the `_` object (from the included Lodash library) and logs the resulting object to the console.
	* This test case is likely comparing the performance of plain object merging vs. using the `_merge()` function from Lodash.
2. **`lodash mergeWith`**
	* The benchmark definition is a JavaScript code snippet that creates two objects, `a` and `b`, defines a custom merge function `mergeFunc`, merges them using this function (`_mergeWith()`) and logs the resulting object to the console.
	* This test case is likely comparing the performance of plain object merging vs. using a custom merge function from Lodash.

**Options Compared**

In both test cases, the following options are being compared:

* Plain object merging (using `_merge()` or default object merging behavior)
* Custom merge function (using `mergeFunc`)

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Plain Object Merging**
	* Pros:
		+ Simple and easy to understand
		+ Less memory usage, as it doesn't require additional data structures
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower due to the need for additional computations (e.g., checking for null or undefined values)
2. **Custom Merge Function**
	* Pros:
		+ Provides more control over the merging process
		+ Can be optimized for specific use cases
	* Cons:
		+ More complex and harder to understand
		+ Requires additional memory usage, as it needs to store the custom merge function

**Lodash Library**

In both test cases, the Lodash library is used. Specifically:

* `_merge()`: a function that merges two objects recursively, handling null or undefined values.
* `_mergeWith()`: a function that takes an optional `mergeFunc` callback and merges two objects using this custom function.

The Lodash library provides a convenient way to perform object merging, but the use of its internal functions can introduce overhead. The benchmark is likely testing the performance benefits of using plain object merging vs. the custom merge function provided by Lodash.

**Other Considerations**

* **ES6+ Support**: Both test cases assume a modern JavaScript environment (likely ES6+ compliant) due to the use of `const` and arrow functions.
* **Memory Safety**: The benchmark may be sensitive to memory safety concerns, as it involves creating objects and modifying them during execution.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are some options:

1. Use a different object merging library or implementation (e.g., `immer`, `deepmerge`).
2. Implement custom object merging using a simple recursive function.
3. Compare the performance of plain object merging with custom merge functions using other languages or frameworks.

Keep in mind that the benchmark results may vary depending on the specific use case, hardware, and software environment.

Related benchmarks:

merge vs mergeWith params (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash merge vs lodash mergeWith

Created: 8 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash merge

lodash mergeWith

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):