Benchmark: filter vs lodash diff1

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var arr1 = ["a", "b "];
var arr2 = ["a", "b"];

Tests:

filter
arr2.filter(d => arr1.includes(d))
lodash difference
_.difference(arr2, arr1)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
filter
lodash difference

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to find the elements in `arr2` that are not present in `arr1`: using the `filter()` method with an arrow function, and using the `_difference()` function from the Lodash library.

**Options Compared**

There are two options compared:

1. **filter()**: This approach uses the `includes()` method to check if each element in `arr2` is present in `arr1`. The resulting array of elements that are not in `arr1` is then returned.
2. **Lodash `_difference()`**: This approach uses Lodash's `_difference()` function, which takes two arrays as input and returns an array containing the elements that are in the first array but not in the second.

**Pros and Cons**

**Filter()**

Pros:

* Simple and well-supported by most browsers
* No additional library dependencies

Cons:

* Can be slower than Lodash's `_difference()` due to the use of `includes()` method, which has to iterate over the entire `arr1` array for each element in `arr2`.
* May not perform well with very large datasets.

**Lodash `_difference()`**

Pros:

* Optimized for performance and can handle large datasets efficiently
* Part of a larger library ecosystem that provides many useful utility functions

Cons:

* Requires loading an additional library, which may add overhead.
* May have dependencies on other Lodash functions or features that aren't relevant to this specific benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark assumes that both `arr1` and `arr2` are arrays of strings. If they were arrays of numbers or objects, the comparison would be different.
* The `filter()` approach uses a simple arrow function (`d => arr1.includes(d)`) to create the callback function. This is a concise way to define small functions in JavaScript.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript library that provides a collection of utility functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more. The `_difference()` function is part of this collection and is designed to efficiently calculate the difference between two arrays.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax (None)**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for finding the elements in `arr2` that are not present in `arr1` include:

* Using a `for...in` loop and manually iterating over each element in `arr2`.
* Using a `set` data structure to keep track of unique elements in `arr1`, then checking if each element in `arr2` is present in the set.
* Using a more advanced library like Ramda, which provides a `differenceBy()` function for working with arrays and objects.

Related benchmarks:

filter vs lodash diff1 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: filter vs lodash difference

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

filter

lodash difference

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):