Benchmark: Lodash "uniqWith" "unionBy" "uniqBy" 6

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var users = [
  { 'name': 'barney',  'age': 36 },
  { 'name': 'pebbles', 'age': 5 }
];

var newUsers = [
  { 'name': 'fred',    'age': 40 },
  { 'name': 'barney',  'age': 36 },
  { 'name': 'pebbles', 'age': 2 }
];

for(let i = 0; i < 2000; i++) {
  var newUser = { 'name': 'user_' + i, 'age': Math.floor(Math.random() * i) };
  newUsers.push(newUser);
}

Tests:

uniqWith
const unionUsers1 = _.uniqWith(newUsers.concat(users), _.isEqual);
unionBy
const unionUsers2 = _.unionBy(newUsers, users, 'name');
uniqBy
const unionUsers1 = _.uniqBy(newUsers.concat(users), 'name');

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 35 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 35 runs

uniqBy

9K/s

unionBy

8K/s

uniqWith

2/s

Fastest: uniqBy (4470.8x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ uniqBy: 8,751 ops/sec
• unionBy: 8,316 ops/sec
• uniqWith: 2 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
uniqWith
unionBy
uniqBy

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/140.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 140 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

uniqBy

10K/s

unionBy

10K/s

uniqWith

2/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ uniqBy	10,420 Ops/sec
unionBy	9,816 Ops/sec
uniqWith	2 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case, which compares different approaches for merging arrays using the Lodash library.

The benchmark consists of three test cases:

1. `uniqWith`
2. `unionBy`
3. `uniqBy`

Each test case uses the Lodash library to merge two arrays: `users` and `newUsers`. The purpose of this exercise is to determine which approach performs better in terms of execution speed.

**Lodash Library**

The Lodash library is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, object creation, and more. In this benchmark, we're using the `uniqWith`, `unionBy`, and `uniqBy` functions from the Lodash library.

* `uniqWith`: This function removes duplicate elements in an array based on a provided comparison function.
* `unionBy`: This function merges two arrays into one, removing duplicates based on a common property (in this case, 'name').
* `uniqBy`: This function also removes duplicate elements in an array, but it uses the 'name' property as the key for comparison.

**Options Compared**

The three test cases compare the following approaches:

1. `uniqWith`: Uses the `_.isEqual` function to compare elements, which checks for strict equality.
2. `unionBy`: Merges two arrays into one, removing duplicates based on the 'name' property of each object in the array.
3. `uniqBy`: Removes duplicate elements from an array, using the 'name' property as the key for comparison.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

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

1. `uniqWith`:
	* Pros: Can handle more complex comparisons (not limited to strict equality).
	* Cons: May be slower due to the additional overhead of comparing elements.
2. `unionBy`:
	* Pros: Efficiently merges two arrays, removing duplicates based on a common property.
	* Cons: Limited to merging arrays based on a single property ('name' in this case).
3. `uniqBy`:
	* Pros: Removes duplicate elements from an array efficiently, using the 'name' property as the key for comparison.
	* Cons: Limited to removing duplicates from an array; not suitable for merging two arrays.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these approaches, consider the specific requirements of your use case. For example:

* If you need to perform complex comparisons or handle irregular data structures, `uniqWith` might be a better choice.
* If you only need to merge two arrays based on a common property, `unionBy` is likely sufficient.
* If you want to remove duplicates from an array efficiently, using the 'name' property as the key for comparison, `uniqBy` is probably the best option.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches or libraries for performing similar operations, consider the following:

* For merging arrays based on a common property: You can use the `Array.prototype.reduce()` method or a custom implementation using `forEach()` and `find()`.
* For removing duplicates from an array: You can use the `Set` object or implement a simple algorithm like `indexOf()` and `push()` to remove duplicates.
* For complex comparisons or data manipulation: Consider using other JavaScript libraries like Ramda, Underscore.js, or even vanilla JavaScript functions like `Array.prototype.filter()`, `Array.prototype.map()`, and `Array.prototype.sort()`.

Lodash "uniqWith" "unionBy" "uniqBy" 6 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `uniqWith vs unionBy vs uniqBy`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

uniqWith

unionBy

uniqBy

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 35 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 35 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Lodash "uniqWith" "unionBy" "uniqBy" 6 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: uniqWith vs unionBy vs uniqBy

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

uniqWith

unionBy

uniqBy

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 35 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 35 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `uniqWith vs unionBy vs uniqBy`