Benchmark: _orderBy vs javascript arr.sort

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 < 100000; i++){
  arr.push({value:getRandomInt(100)});
}

Tests:

_.sortBy
_.sortBy(arr,"value");
_.orderBy
_.orderBy(arr,"value", "asc");
JS sort
arr.sort((a,b) => a.value - b.value);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.sortBy
_.orderBy
JS sort

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net, which compares three approaches for sorting an array of objects with a numerical "value" property: Lodash's `_.sortBy`, `_.orderBy`, and the built-in JavaScript array method `sort`.

**Options compared:**

1. **Lodash's `_sortBy`**: This function takes an array and returns a new sorted array, but unlike the other two options, it doesn't modify the original array. It uses a stable sorting algorithm to maintain the relative order of equal elements.
2. **Lodash's `_orderBy`**: Similar to `_.sortBy`, this function sorts the array based on a specific key (in this case, "value") and returns a new sorted array without modifying the original one. However, it allows for ascending or descending ordering by specifying the second argument ("asc" or "-asc").
3. **JavaScript's built-in `sort` method**: This function modifies the original array and sorts it in-place using a stable sorting algorithm.

**Pros and Cons:**

*   **Lodash's `_sortBy`**:
    *   Pros:
        *   Provides a stable sorting algorithm.
        *   Does not modify the original array, making it suitable for preserving data integrity.
    *   Cons:
        *   Requires an external library (Lodash).
        *   May have a performance overhead due to the need to import and initialize the Lodash library.
*   **Lodash's `_orderBy`**:
    *   Pros:
        *   Allows for ascending or descending ordering, making it more flexible than JavaScript's built-in `sort`.
        *   Provides stability like Lodash's `_sortBy`.
    *   Cons:
        *   Requires an external library (Lodash).
        *   May have a performance overhead due to the need to import and initialize the Lodash library.
*   **JavaScript's built-in `sort` method**:
    *   Pros:
        *   No additional libraries or dependencies required.
        *   Can be optimized for specific use cases, like merging multiple arrays or sorting objects based on multiple keys.
    *   Cons:
        *   May not maintain the relative order of equal elements (non-stable sort).
        *   Modifies the original array, potentially affecting data integrity.

**Library used:**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a comprehensive set of functions for various tasks, including sorting. The `_.sortBy` and `_.orderBy` functions are part of Lodash's functional programming utilities.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

None mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives:**

If you want to implement your own sorting algorithm or use an alternative library, some options include:

*   **QuickSort**: A divide-and-conquer algorithm for sorting arrays.
*   **Merge Sort**: Another divide-and-conquer algorithm for sorting arrays.
*   **Heap Sort**: A comparison-based sorting algorithm that uses a heap data structure.
*   **Algorithm X**: A proprietary sorting algorithm developed by Google, which is considered to be one of the fastest and most efficient algorithms.

Keep in mind that implementing an optimized sorting algorithm requires a good understanding of computer science concepts and performance optimization techniques.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/107.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 107 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
_.sortBy	8.6 Ops/sec
_.orderBy	8.9 Ops/sec
JS sort	153.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

_orderBy vs javascript arr.sort (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.sortBy vs _.orderBy vs JS sort

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.sortBy

_.orderBy

JS sort

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):