Benchmark: Compare Intersection lodash & filter

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var arrFull = ['past','present','future']

Tests:

Intersection
_.intersection(arrFull, arrFull)
filter
arrFull.filter(item => arrFull.includes(item))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Intersection
filter

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 dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance comparison between two JavaScript functions: `lodash.intersection()` and the `filter` method without using `includes()`, which is the built-in array method in modern JavaScript. Both functions are used to find common elements between two arrays.

**Options compared:**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Lodash's `intersection()` function**: This is a utility function from the Lodash library that takes two arrays as input and returns an array containing only the elements present in both input arrays.
2. **Array `filter` method without using `includes()`**: In this approach, we're iterating over each element in the first array and checking if it exists in the second array using a traditional loop or recursion.

**Pros and Cons:**

* Lodash's `intersection()` function:
	+ Pros: It's optimized for performance, handles edge cases (like empty arrays), and is generally faster due to its optimized implementation.
	+ Cons: We need to include an additional library in our test case, which may add overhead.
* Array `filter` method without using `includes()`:
	+ Pros: No additional libraries are needed, making it a simpler setup. However, the performance might not be as good as Lodash's implementation due to its iterative nature and potential recursion for deeper arrays.
	+ Cons: It can have higher overhead due to array iteration, recursion, or explicit checks.

**Other considerations:**

When testing these two functions, we should also consider factors like:

* Array size: How does the performance change with larger input sizes?
* Hardware platform: Different hardware architectures may affect execution speeds.
* Browser optimizations: Some browsers might optimize specific JavaScript methods more than others.

**Library and its purpose:**

The `lodash` library provides a collection of reusable functions for various tasks, including array manipulation. In this case, the `intersection()` function is designed to efficiently find common elements between two arrays.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There's no specific special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in these benchmarks. Both approaches rely on standard JavaScript methods and libraries (in this case, Lodash).

Related benchmarks:

Compare Intersection lodash & filter (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Intersection vs filter

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Intersection

filter

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):