Benchmark: Lodash.js vs Native 69

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i <= 1000; i++) { arr.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 100)); }

Tests:

Native
[...new Set(arr)];
Lodash.js filter
_.uniq(arr);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native
Lodash.js 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 break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches: native JavaScript (without any libraries) and Lodash.js, specifically the `uniq` function from Lodash.

**What are we testing?**

We're testing how quickly each approach can create a unique array of numbers. The test case "Native" generates an array of 1000 random integers using JavaScript's built-in functions (`Math.random()` and `push()`) and then creates a new set from the array using the `[...new Set(arr)]` syntax.

The test case "Lodash.js filter" does the same thing, but uses Lodash's `uniq` function to create a unique array. The main difference is that it relies on an external library (Lodash) to perform the filtering.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, we have two options being compared:

1. **Native**: Using only JavaScript's built-in functions and syntax.
2. **Lodash.js filter**: Using Lodash's `uniq` function, which is a third-party library.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Native:**

Pros:

* No external dependencies or overhead
* Can be optimized for performance by the browser engine
* Simplifies benchmarking (no need to consider library versions)

Cons:

* May require more complex implementation or optimization techniques
* Can be slower due to the overhead of creating a new set

**Lodash.js filter:**

Pros:

* Often faster due to Lodash's optimized and cache-friendly algorithms
* Easy to implement and maintain
* Reduces the risk of platform-specific issues

Cons:

* Adds external dependency, which can introduce overhead
* Requires consideration of library version and updates

**Other Considerations**

* The use of `Math.random()` and `push()` in the native approach may not be optimal for performance.
* Lodash's `uniq` function uses a caching mechanism to improve performance, but this also adds complexity.
* The benchmark only tests one specific function (`uniq`) from Lodash; other functions might perform differently.

**Library Used**

The library used is Lodash, specifically the version 4.17.4. Lodash provides a set of useful utilities for functional programming in JavaScript, including the `uniq` function used in this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The use of `[...new Set(arr)]` is an example of using a modern JavaScript feature called "spread syntax" (also known as "rest spread operator") to create a new set from an array. This syntax was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 and has since become widely adopted.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are some options:

* Using a different filtering algorithm, such as `Array.prototype.filter()` or a custom implementation.
* Comparing the performance of other Lodash functions (e.g., `uniqWith`, `uniqWithKey`).
* Investigating the impact of platform-specific optimizations or browser features on native JavaScript performance.

I hope this explanation helps you understand what's being tested in MeasureThat.net!

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.js vs Native 69 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native vs Lodash.js filter

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native

Lodash.js 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):