Benchmark: _,get vs get - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

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

Tests:

_.get
var object = { 'a': [{ 'b': { 'c': 3 } }] }; _.get(object, 'a[0].b.c');
native
var object = { 'a': [{ 'b': { 'c': 3 } }] }; const get = (obj, path, defaultValue) => { const result = String.prototype.split.call(path, /[,[\].]+?/) .filter(Boolean) .reduce((res, key) => (res !== null && res !== undefined) ? res[key] : res, obj); return (result === undefined || result === obj) ? defaultValue : result; } get(object, 'a[0].b.c');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.get
native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 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
_.get	4709853.0 Ops/sec
native	1676316.4 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test creates an object `object` with nested properties: `{ 'a': [{ 'b': { 'c': 3 } }] }`. The goal is to retrieve the value of `object.a[0].b.c`.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Lodash's `_get()` function**: This is a utility function from the Lodash library that takes an object, a path (e.g., `'a[0].b.c'`), and returns the value at that path if it exists, or a default value otherwise.
2. **Native implementation**: A custom implementation of the same logic using JavaScript's `String.prototype.split()` method to extract the path components and then recursively traversing the object to find the value.

**Pros and Cons**

### Lodash's `_get()` function

Pros:

* Lightweight and efficient, as it's a specialized utility function designed for this specific use case.
* Easy to read and maintain, with a clear and concise API.

Cons:

* Requires an external library (Lodash) to be included in the test environment.
* May not be suitable for all scenarios where custom logic is required or performance optimization is necessary.

### Native implementation

Pros:

* No external dependencies, as it's implemented directly in JavaScript.
* Can be optimized for specific use cases or performance requirements.

Cons:

* More complex and harder to read due to the recursive function definition.
* May incur additional overhead due to the custom logic.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of reusable functions, including `_get()`. It's designed to make common tasks easier and more efficient. In this benchmark, Lodash's `_get()` function is used to retrieve values from nested objects.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided code snippet.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to implement a custom solution without using an external library, you might consider using other approaches:

* Using a recursive function with a stack-based implementation.
* Utilizing `JSON.parse()` and `JSON.stringify()` methods to serialize the object path as a JSON string.
* Leveraging built-in functions like `Object.keys()`, `Array.prototype.forEach()`, or `String.prototype.split()`.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as efficient or readable as the native implementation or Lodash's `_get()` function.

Related benchmarks:

_,get vs get (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.get vs native

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.get

native

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):