Benchmark: filter vs _without (v2)

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var array = [...Array(100000).keys()];
var DEPRECATED = [98100];
var CLEAR_DEPRECATED = [];

Tests:

filter
array.filter(n => DEPRECATED.includes(n));
_without
_.without(array, ...DEPRECATED);
filter clear
array.filter(n => CLEAR_DEPRECATED.includes(n));
_without clear
_.without(array, ...CLEAR_DEPRECATED);
check length
if(CLEAR_DEPRECATED.length){ _.without(array, ...CLEAR_DEPRECATED); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
filter
_without
filter clear
_without clear
check length

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
filter	1549.8 Ops/sec
_without	2465.3 Ops/sec
filter clear	1636.5 Ops/sec
_without clear	3633.5 Ops/sec
check length	112220936.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and analyze what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three approaches to filter out elements from an array:

1. `Array.prototype.filter()`
2. `_without()` function from Lodash library
3. Conditional check with `_without()` when a specific condition is met

**Options Compared**

Here are the options being compared, along with their pros and cons:

### 1. `Array.prototype.filter()`

* **Pros:** Simple and intuitive syntax, widely supported by browsers.
* **Cons:** May have poor performance for large datasets due to the overhead of the `filter()` method.

### 2. `_without()` function from Lodash library

* **Pros:** Optimized for performance, especially when dealing with large arrays. Also provides a concise syntax.
* **Cons:** Requires an external library (Lodash) which may not be included in all projects.

**Other Considerations**

In addition to the above options, there's also a conditional check using `_without()`:

```javascript
if(CLEAR_DEPRECATED.length){\r\n  _.without(array, ...CLEAR_DEPRECATED);\r\n}
```

This approach has the same pros and cons as `_without()`, but with an added layer of complexity due to the conditional statement.

**Lodash Library**

The `_without()` function is part of the Lodash library, which provides a collection of useful functions for functional programming. In this benchmark, Lodash is included in the HTML preparation code using a script tag.

**JavaScript Features/Syntax**

None of the above options rely on any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's supported by modern browsers.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to filtering arrays, some other options include:

* Using `Array.prototype.every()` and `Array.prototype.some()`
* Utilizing libraries like `p-queue` or `fast-filter` which are optimized for performance
* Implementing a custom filtering function using iteration

Keep in mind that the best approach will depend on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

filter vs _without (v2) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: filter vs _without vs filter clear vs _without clear vs check length

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

filter

_without

filter clear

_without clear

check length

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):