Benchmark: Filter duplicates

Tests:

Set
const arr = ['audi', 'audi', 'bmw', 'renault', 'renault', 'audi']; const a = [...new Set(arr)]; return a;
Filter+indexOf
const arr = ['audi', 'audi', 'bmw', 'renault', 'renault', 'audi']; const a = arr.filter((brand, index) => arr.indexOf(brand) === index); return a;
Reduce+includes
const arr = ['audi', 'audi', 'bmw', 'renault', 'renault', 'audi']; const a = arr.reduce((acc, val) => { if(!acc.includes(val)) { acc.push(val); } return acc; }, []); return a;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Set
Filter+indexOf
Reduce+includes

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 the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different approaches to remove duplicates from an array:

1. **Set**: Using the `Set` data structure to create a new array with unique elements.
2. **Filter+indexOf**: Using the `filter()` method in conjunction with `indexOf()` to filter out duplicate elements.
3. **Reduce+includes**: Using the `reduce()` method and `includes()` method to push unique elements into an accumulator array.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares these three approaches, which can be considered as different trade-offs between:

* **Memory usage**: Creating a new Set uses more memory than the other two approaches.
* **Algorithmic complexity**: The Set approach is generally faster and more efficient for large datasets, while Filter+indexOf might be slower due to the extra lookup. Reduce+includes might have a higher constant factor but can still be quite fast.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

1. **Set**:
	* Pros: Fastest, most efficient, and scalable.
	* Cons: Higher memory usage, requires additional data structure (Set).
2. **Filter+indexOf**:
	* Pros: Simple to implement, uses built-in methods.
	* Cons: Slower due to extra lookup, may not be suitable for very large datasets.
3. **Reduce+includes**:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient than Filter+indexOf, avoids extra lookup.
	* Cons: May have higher constant factor, requires using accumulator array.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

None of the test cases use any external libraries or special JavaScript features beyond standard JavaScript syntax.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other possible approaches to remove duplicates from an array could include:

1. **Array.prototype.indexOf() + Array.prototype.concat()**: A simple approach that uses `indexOf()` to filter out duplicates, but may be slower.
2. **Array.prototype.reduce() with custom logic**: An alternative implementation using `reduce()` with custom logic to push unique elements into the accumulator array.
3. **Using a sorting-based approach**: Sorting the array and then removing duplicates based on their indices.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as efficient or scalable as the approaches tested in this benchmark, but they could provide an interesting comparison for specific use cases.

Related benchmarks:

Filter duplicates (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Set vs Filter+indexOf vs Reduce+includes

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Set

Filter+indexOf

Reduce+includes

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):