Benchmark: set filter - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

filter
const x = new Set([1,2,6,7]); const y = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8]; const z = new Set(y.filter((elt) => x.has(elt)));
for loop
const x = new Set([1,2,6,7]); const y = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8]; const z = new Set(); for (const elt of y) { if (x.has(elt)) { z.add(elt) } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
filter
for loop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON benchmark definition and test cases for you.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Set filter` benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for filtering elements from an array using a `Set` object in JavaScript.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Using a Set with the `filter()` method**: This approach creates a new `Set` object (`x`) and then uses its `filter()` method to create another `Set` object (`z`) containing only the elements present in both `x` and the input array (`y`).
2. **Using a For Loop with an If Statement**: This approach iterates through the input array (`y`) using a for loop, checks each element against the `Set` object (`x`) to see if it's present, and adds it to another `Set` object (`z`) if it is.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Using a Set with the `filter()` method**:
	* Pros: This approach is concise, efficient, and uses built-in JavaScript features.
	* Cons: It may not be suitable for very large datasets or when memory is limited, as creating a new `Set` object can consume significant resources.
2. **Using a For Loop with an If Statement**:
	* Pros: This approach can be more suitable for large datasets and when memory is limited, as it avoids creating a new `Set` object.
	* Cons: It's less concise and may be slower than the first approach.

**Library Usage**

There are no external libraries used in these benchmark definitions. However, JavaScript's built-in `Set` data structure is being utilized in both approaches.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None of the provided test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's described above.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, consider the following:

* Using `Array.prototype.filter()` with a callback function instead of creating a new `Set` object.
* Using a library like Lodash or Underscore.js, which provide utility functions for array manipulation and filtering.

Example using `Array.prototype.filter()`:
```javascript
const x = new Set([1,2,6,7]);
const y = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8];
const z = [...y].filter(elt => x.has(elt));
```
Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and memory usage compared to the original approaches.

Related benchmarks:

set filter (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: filter vs for loop

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

filter

for loop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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