Benchmark: np sorting test - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}

var arr = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++){
  arr.push({value:getRandomInt(100)});
}

Tests:

_.orderBy(arr, "value", "asc")
_.orderBy(arr,"value");
_.sortBy(arr,"value");
_.sortBy(arr,"value");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.orderBy(arr, "value", "asc")
_.sortBy(arr,"value");

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark test for you.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark tests the performance of two different sorting methods provided by the Lodash library: `_.orderBy` and `_.sortBy`. Both methods are used to sort an array of objects based on a specific "value" property. The test compares the execution speed of these two approaches.

**Options compared:**

1. **_.orderBy(arr, "value", "asc")**: This method sorts the array in ascending order (from smallest to largest) based on the "value" property.
2. **_.sortBy(arr, "value")**: This method also sorts the array based on the "value" property, but unlike _.orderBy, it does not specify an ordering direction (ascending or descending). By default, _.sortBy uses a stable sorting algorithm that preserves the relative order of equal elements.

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **_.orderBy(arr, "value", "asc")**: This approach is straightforward and easy to understand. It explicitly specifies the ordering direction, which can be beneficial for certain use cases.
	* Pros:
		+ Easy to understand and implement
		+ Explicit ordering direction ensures predictability
	* Cons:
		+ May not be suitable for all scenarios where sorting order isn't explicitly required
2. **_.sortBy(arr, "value")**: This approach is more versatile and can handle cases where the sorting order isn't specified.
	* Pros:
		+ More flexible and adaptable to different use cases
		+ Stable sorting algorithm preserves relative order of equal elements
	* Cons:
		+ May require more mental effort to understand, as the default behavior is not immediately apparent

**Library:**

The Lodash library provides a wide range of utility functions for JavaScript developers. In this benchmark, two specific methods from Lodash are used:

1. **_.orderBy(arr, "value", "asc")**: This method sorts an array in place (modifying the original array) based on a specified property.
2. **_.sortBy(arr, "value")**: Similar to _.orderBy, but without specifying an ordering direction.

Both methods use stable sorting algorithms to ensure that equal elements maintain their relative order.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

None mentioned in this benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript features and syntax.

**Other alternatives:**

If you prefer not to use the Lodash library or want to explore alternative implementations, here are a few options:

1. **Native Array.prototype.sort()**: You can sort an array using the native `sort()` method, which also sorts based on the "value" property.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript sorting algorithms**: Implement custom sorting algorithms like bubble sort, insertion sort, or merge sort to compare with Lodash's implementations.
3. **Other libraries**: Other libraries like Moment.js for date-based sorting or FastSort for optimized sorting performance may be viable alternatives.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might require more code and expertise than using a tested library like Lodash.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/71.0.3578.98 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 71 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
_.orderBy(arr, "value", "asc")	529.0 Ops/sec
_.sortBy(arr,"value");	535.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

np sorting test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.orderBy(arr, "value", "asc") vs _.sortBy(arr,"value");

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

_.orderBy(arr, "value", "asc")

_.sortBy(arr,"value");

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):