Benchmark: lodash uniq vs set 211111

HTML Preparation code:

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

Tests:

Set
var l = Array.from(new Set([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7])); return l;
Array
var l = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7]; return _.uniq(l);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Set
Array

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.

Let's break down what's being tested in this benchmark.

The test is comparing two approaches to remove duplicates from an array: using the `Array.from()` method with a `Set` object, and using the Lodash library's `uniq()` function.

**Approaches compared:**

1. **Array.from() + Set**: This approach uses the `Array.from()` method to create an array from a set of values, and then returns the resulting array. The set is created by passing an array of numbers to it, which automatically removes duplicates.
2. **Lodash's uniq() function**: This approach uses Lodash's `uniq()` function to remove duplicates from an array.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **Array.from() + Set**:
	* Pros:
		+ Lightweight, as it only uses built-in JavaScript methods.
		+ Simple to implement.
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower than using Lodash's `uniq()` function, as it involves creating a set and then converting it back to an array.
2. **Lodash's uniq() function**:
	* Pros:
		+ Often faster than the first approach, since it is optimized for performance.
		+ Can handle more complex cases, such as removing duplicates while preserving the original order of elements.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires including an external library (in this case, Lodash).
		+ May be heavier on the client-side due to the additional library dependency.

**Other considerations:**

1. **Optimization**: Lodash's `uniq()` function is often optimized for performance, which can result in faster execution times.
2. **Memory usage**: The first approach (using `Array.from()` and a set) may use more memory than the second approach, since it involves creating an additional set object.

**Special JS features or syntax:**

In this benchmark, there are no special JavaScript features or syntax being used that would require additional explanation.

**Library used:**

* Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides various functions for tasks such as string manipulation, array manipulation, and more. In this benchmark, the `uniq()` function is used to remove duplicates from an array.

**Alternatives:**

If you don't want to use Lodash or prefer not to include additional libraries on your client-side, you could consider using other approaches to remove duplicates from an array, such as:

1. Using a custom implementation with a set data structure.
2. Using the `filter()` method in combination with a conditional statement to remove duplicates.

However, these alternatives may be less efficient and more complex than using Lodash's `uniq()` function or the first approach (using `Array.from()` and a set).

Related benchmarks:

lodash uniq vs set 211111 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Set vs Array

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Set

Array

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):