Benchmark: Remove duplicate values from an array of objects

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [
    {label: "All", value: "All"},
    {label: "All", value: "All"},
    {label: "Alex", value: "Ninja"},
    {label: "Bill", value: "Op"},
    {label: "Cill", value: "iopop"}
]

Tests:

reduce and some
var result = arr.reduce((unique, o) => { if(!unique.some(obj => obj.label === o.label && obj.value === o.value)) { unique.push(o); } return unique; },[]);
filter and findIndex
var result = arr.filter((v,i,a)=>a.findIndex(t=>(t.label === v.label && t.value===v.value))===i)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
reduce and some
filter and findIndex

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.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that tests two different approaches to removing duplicate values from an array of objects: using the `reduce()` method with a callback function (`"reduce and some"`), and using the `filter()` method in combination with `findIndex()` (`"filter and findIndex"`).

**Approaches Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches on the same input data.

### 1. "reduce and some"

This approach uses the `reduce()` method to iterate over the array, accumulating a new array that contains unique objects. The callback function checks for duplicates by verifying if an object with the same label and value already exists in the accumulator array (`unique`). If not, it pushes the current object onto the accumulator.

**Pros:**

* Can be more efficient for small arrays or when exact matching is required.
* Allows for easy handling of edge cases (e.g., `undefined` values).

**Cons:**

* Can be slower than other approaches due to the overhead of recursive function calls and array iterations.
* May not perform well for large arrays, as it needs to iterate over the entire array.

### 2. "filter and findIndex"

This approach uses the `filter()` method to create a new array that contains only the objects that do not have duplicates in the original array. The `findIndex()` method is used to find the index of an object with the same label and value as the current object, returning -1 if no match is found.

**Pros:**

* Typically faster than the "reduce and some" approach for large arrays.
* More efficient when dealing with sparse arrays or arrays with many empty values.

**Cons:**

* May not be suitable for small arrays or edge cases (e.g., `undefined` values).
* Requires careful consideration of the array's structure to avoid unnecessary iterations.

**Library and Special Features**

None of the provided benchmark code uses any libraries or special JavaScript features beyond standard ES6 syntax. However, it does utilize some built-in methods like `some()`, `reduce()`, `filter()`, and `findIndex()`.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to removing duplicates from an array of objects include:

* Using a hash table (e.g., `Map`) to store unique values.
* Employing a sorting-based approach, where the array is sorted by label and value, and then duplicate values are removed.
* Utilizing a more advanced data structure like a graph database or a spatial index, depending on the specific requirements of the use case.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own trade-offs in terms of performance, memory usage, and complexity. The choice of approach ultimately depends on the specific needs and constraints of your project.

Related benchmarks:

Remove duplicate values from an array of objects (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: reduce and some vs filter and findIndex

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

reduce and some

filter and findIndex

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):