Benchmark: pick first key of objecT: lodash vs Object.keys vs for...in...break

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.11/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var value = {a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494};

Tests:

native (object.keys)
Object.keys(value)[0]
lodash
_.keys(value)[0]
native (for...in...break)
for(const k in value) { break; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
native (object.keys)
lodash
native (for...in...break)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case, which compares the performance of three approaches: using `Object.keys()`, using `_.keys()` (from the Lodash library), and using a `for...in...break` loop.

**Approaches Compared**

The three approaches compared are:

1. **Native (object.keys)**: This approach uses the built-in `Object.keys()` method to get an array of the object's property names.
2. **Lodash (.keys())**: This approach uses the Lodash library's `_.keys()` function to achieve the same result as `Object.keys()`.
3. **Native (for...in...break)**: This approach uses a traditional `for...in...break` loop to iterate over the object's properties and extract the first one.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Native (object.keys)**
	* Pros:
		+ Fast, as it only iterates over the object's properties once.
		+ Memory-efficient, as it doesn't create a new array.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be supported in older browsers or environments that don't have this method.
2. **Lodash (.keys())**
	* Pros:
		+ Portable across different browsers and environments, as Lodash is a widely-used library.
		+ Can be useful for other tasks beyond just getting the keys of an object.
	* Cons:
		+ May introduce additional overhead due to the library's existence.
		+ May not be optimized for performance, as it involves a function call and argument passing.
3. **Native (for...in...break)**
	* Pros:
		+ Can be useful for tasks beyond just getting the keys of an object, such as iterating over properties and performing actions on them.
	* Cons:
		+ Slower than `Object.keys()`, as it iterates over the object's properties multiple times.
		+ More memory-intensive, as it creates a new array or object to store the results.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript library that provides a set of reusable functions for tasks beyond basic JavaScript functionality. In this benchmark, `_.keys()` is used to get an array of the object's property names.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes used in this benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these approaches, consider the specific requirements of your project and the trade-offs between performance, memory usage, and portability. If you need to support older browsers or environments, `Object.keys()` may not be an option. However, if you prioritize speed and memory efficiency, `Object.keys()` might be a good choice.

For other use cases where you need to iterate over properties of an object, the `for...in...break` loop approach can be useful, but it may come at the cost of performance and memory usage.

In terms of alternatives, you could consider using other libraries or functions that provide similar functionality to Lodash's `.keys()` method. Some examples include:

* `Array.prototype.map()`: You can use `Array.prototype.map()` to create a new array with the keys of an object.
* `Object.getOwnPropertyNames()`: This method returns an array of the object's own property names, including inherited properties.
* Custom implementation using `for...in...break` or other iteration methods.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
native (object.keys)	3124090.5 Ops/sec
lodash	2778391.0 Ops/sec
native (for...in...break)	7617454.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

pick first key of objecT: lodash vs Object.keys vs for...in...break (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: native (object.keys) vs lodash vs native (for...in...break)

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

native (object.keys)

lodash

native (for...in...break)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):