Benchmark: Lodash vs mitel - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var arrFull = ['present', 'present','future', 'past', 'present','future']
var arrOne = ['past', 'future']

function filtersExist(actualFilters, filtersToCheck){ return filtersToCheck.find(filter => actualFilters.find(actual => actual === filter)) }

Tests:

Difference - Full
_.difference(arrFull, arrFull)
Intersection - Full
_.intersection(arrFull, arrFull)
Difference - Partial
_.difference(arrFull, arrOne)
Intersection - Partial
_.intersection(arrOne, arrFull)
mitel
filtersExist(arrFull, arrOne)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Difference - Full
Intersection - Full
Difference - Partial
Intersection - Partial
mitel

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring JavaScript performance is crucial for optimizing code and identifying bottlenecks. The provided benchmark definition tests the performance of two popular JavaScript libraries: Lodash and MIT.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark consists of several test cases, each comparing the execution time of a specific function:

1. `_.difference(arrFull, arrFull)` - Calculates the difference between two arrays.
2. `_.intersection(arrFull, arrFull)` - Finds the intersection between two arrays.
3. `_.difference(arrFull, arrOne)` and `_.intersection(arrOne, arrFull)` - Calculate the difference and intersection between two arrays (`arrFull` and `arrOne`).
4. `filtersExist(arrFull, arrOne)` - A custom function that checks if a filter exists in an array.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the execution time of Lodash's `_difference`, `_intersection`, and `filtersExist` functions with MIT's equivalent implementation (if any). However, since MIT is not explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition, it's likely that the comparison is between the two libraries' implementations of these functions.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

Lodash:
Pros:
- Well-maintained and widely used library
- Provides a simple and concise API for array operations

Cons:
- Might be overkill for small projects or personal use cases
- Can add unnecessary overhead due to its feature-rich nature

MIT (Lodash's equivalent):
Pros:
- Lightweight and optimized for performance
- Suitable for small projects or when resources are limited

Cons:
- Less maintainable and less popular compared to Lodash
- Might require more manual effort to implement array operations

**Library and Purpose**

Lodash is a JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for working with arrays, objects, strings, and other data structures. Its primary purpose is to simplify common tasks and provide a consistent API across different programming languages.

MIT (Lodash's equivalent) is likely a custom implementation of Lodash's array operations. While it may not be as comprehensive or well-maintained as the original Lodash library, it can still provide a suitable alternative for small projects or when resources are limited.

**Special JavaScript Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned in this benchmark definition.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for lightweight alternatives to Lodash or MIT, consider the following options:

1. **Underscore.js**: A minimalist version of Lodash that provides only the essential functions.
2. **Lo-Dash**: A faster and more efficient implementation of Lodash's array operations.
3. **Lodash-lite**: A stripped-down version of Lodash that includes only the most commonly used functions.

For a truly custom solution, you can explore other JavaScript libraries or frameworks that provide similar functionality to Lodash or MIT.

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/73.0.3683.86 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 73 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Difference - Full	1034689.9 Ops/sec
Intersection - Full	917073.2 Ops/sec
Difference - Partial	954575.9 Ops/sec
Intersection - Partial	1040405.7 Ops/sec
mitel	3035885.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Lodash vs mitel (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Difference - Full vs Intersection - Full vs Difference - Partial vs Intersection - Partial vs mitel

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Difference - Full

Intersection - Full

Difference - Partial

Intersection - Partial

mitel

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):