Benchmark: asdasdasdasd - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var AssetCategory = {
  NONE: 'NONE',
  VESSEL: 'VESSEL'
}

Tests:

Lodash
_(AssetCategory).omit([AssetCategory.NONE]).values().value()
Filter/Map
Object.keys(AssetCategory) .filter(x => x !== AssetCategory.NONE) .map(key => ({ label: key, value: key }));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Filter/Map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON and understand what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a set of scripts that need to be executed on various JavaScript environments. The script preparation code provides some context for these tests:

```javascript
var AssetCategory = {
  NONE: 'NONE',
  VESSEL: 'VESSEL'
};
```

This defines an object `AssetCategory` with two properties: `NONE` and `VESSEL`.

The HTML preparation code includes a reference to the Lodash library, which is a popular utility library for JavaScript:

```html
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>
```

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases in this benchmark:

1. **Lodash**

The first test case tests the performance of Lodash's `omit()` function on the `AssetCategory` object:

```javascript
_(AssetCategory).omit([AssetCategory.NONE]).values().value()
```

This is a concise way to remove all occurrences of `'NONE'` from the `AssetCategory` object.

2. **Filter/Map**

The second test case tests the performance of filtering and mapping over an object's keys:

```javascript
Object.keys(AssetCategory)
  .filter(x => x !== AssetCategory.NONE)
  .map(key => ({ label: key, value: key }));
```

This is a basic example of using `Array.prototype.filter()` and `Array.prototype.map()` to create a new array with the desired data.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two approaches for each test case:

1. **Lodash**

The two options being compared are:

* Using Lodash's `omit()` function directly.
    * Not using any library, i.e., implementing the same functionality manually.

2. **Filter/Map**

The two options being compared are:

* Using `Array.prototype.filter()` and `Array.prototype.map()`.
    * Not using any library, i.e., implementing the same functionality manually using a loop or other methods.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

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

1. **Lodash (omit)**

Pros:
   - Efficient implementation optimized by Lodash.
   - Easy to read and maintain due to concise syntax.
   - Often already included in projects with dependencies.

Cons:
   - Additional dependency required.
   - May not be suitable for projects without Lodash.

2. **Manual Implementation (Lodash)**

Pros:
   - No additional dependencies required.
   - Can be customized or optimized further.
   - Suitable for smaller projects or personal use cases.

Cons:
   - More code to write and maintain.
   - Error-prone if not implemented correctly.

3. **Filter/Map**

Pros:
   - Standard JavaScript methods, widely supported.
   - Easy to understand and implement manually.
   - Does not require additional dependencies.

Cons:
   - May be slower than optimized libraries like Lodash.
   - Can be less concise due to the need for manual iteration.

4. **Manual Implementation (Filter/Map)**

Pros:
   - No additional dependencies required.
   - Can be customized or optimized further.
   - Suitable for smaller projects or personal use cases.

Cons:
   - More code to write and maintain.
   - Error-prone if not implemented correctly.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular utility library that provides various helper functions, including `omit()`. It's widely used in the JavaScript community and can simplify certain tasks. However, it does require an additional dependency for projects.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax: None**

There are no special features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark that would be specific to any particular version of JavaScript.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to Lodash or the `filter/map` approach, consider:

1. **Moment.js**: A popular library for date and time manipulation.
2. **Underscore.js**: Another utility library similar to Lodash.
3. **lodash-es**: A variant of Lodash optimized for ES modules.

For manual implementation, explore standard JavaScript methods or create your own custom functions.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your specific project requirements, performance considerations, and personal preferences as a developer.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/78.0.3904.108 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 78 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	347224.4 Ops/sec
Filter/Map	1955090.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

asdasdasdasd (version: 0)

asdasdasd

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Filter/Map

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Filter/Map

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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