Understanding the `Difference Between Underscore _.map and JavaScript's Built-in map Function

Explore the practical differences between Underscore's `_.map` and the built-in JavaScript `map` function, and learn when to use each for optimal coding efficiency.
---

Visit these links for original content and any more details, such as alternate solutions, latest updates/developments on topic, comments, revision history etc. For example, the original title of the Question was: Is there any difference between Underscore _.map and the JS built-in function?

If anything seems off to you, please feel free to write me at vlogize [AT] gmail [DOT] com.
---
Understanding the Difference Between Underscore _.map and JavaScript's Built-in map Function

If you've dabbled in JavaScript, you may have come across both the built-in map function and Underscore's (or Lodash's) _.map. At first glance, they operate similarly, allowing you to transform arrays efficiently. However, there are significant differences that can impact your coding decisions. In this post, we’ll break down these differences and help you decide when to use each function effectively.

What is the JavaScript map Function?

The map function is an integral part of the JavaScript Array prototype, designed to transform elements in an array by applying a given function to each element. This is how it typically looks:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

In this snippet, each element of myArr is squared, resulting in a new array of squared numbers.

What is Underscore's (or Lodash's) _.map?

_.map is a utility function provided by libraries like Underscore and Lodash, which extends the standard mapping functionality. This function is versatile and supports both arrays and objects, enabling you to use it in different contexts.

Differences Between _.map and JavaScript’s Built-in map

There are two main differences between these two mapping functions:

1. Object Compatibility

The built-in map function only works on arrays. Attempting to use it on objects without a length property results in an error.

Example using Underscore’s _.map:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

Example with JavaScript’s map:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

In this case, only Underscore's _.map can handle objects seamlessly, making it more versatile in certain scenarios.

2. Iteratee Shorthands Support

Underscore's _.map supports convenience shorthand for iterating over objects and arrays, which is a feature absent from the built-in map function.

Examples:

Getting lengths of nested arrays:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

Extracting specific properties from objects:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

With just a string, you can extract properties without writing additional functions, which can greatly speed up your development process.

3. Optional Binding Context

Another difference, albeit a minor one, is that Underscore's _.map supports an optional third argument for binding the this context to the callback function.

Example:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

This feature allows more dynamic and flexible function calls when transforming data.

Conclusion

In summary:

Use _.map when you need object support, shorthand capabilities, or context binding.

Stick with JavaScript’s map for straightforward array transformations when performance is a critical factor, as it’s built into the language.

By understanding these differences, you can enhance your coding toolkit and write more efficient JavaScript code.