Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash unique vs [...Set]
(version: 0)
lodash unique compared to converting a set to array of same list
Comparing performance of:
set vs uniq
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js'></script>
Tests:
set
var l = [...new Set([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7])]; return l;
uniq
var l = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7]; return _.uniq(l);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
set
uniq
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):
Let's break down what's being tested in the provided JSON benchmark. **Benchmark Goal** The goal of this benchmark is to compare the performance of two approaches for removing duplicates from an array: 1. Using a JavaScript `Set` object (`lodash unique`) 2. Converting a `Set` object to an array using the spread operator (`[...new Set([...])]`) **Options Compared** We have two options being compared: * Option 1: Using `lodash.unique`, which is a utility function provided by the Lodash library. This function takes an array as input and returns a new array with duplicates removed. * Option 2: Converting a `Set` object to an array using the spread operator (`[...new Set([...])]`). This approach creates a new array with unique elements from the original set. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **Lodash `.unique()`**: Pros: * Concise and readable code * Optimized for performance by using a specialized algorithm * Relies on Lodash library, which is widely used and maintained Cons: * Adds an external dependency (Lodash) * May have slightly slower execution due to the overhead of the Lodash library 2. **Converting `Set` to array**: Pros: + No external dependencies or added overhead + Can be optimized for performance using native JavaScript methods Cons: + Code may look less concise and more verbose compared to `.unique()` + May not be as optimized for performance as the Lodash implementation **Library: `lodash.unique()`** `lodash.unique()` is a utility function provided by the Lodash library. It takes an array as input, removes duplicates using a specialized algorithm, and returns a new array with unique elements. **Special JS Feature/Syntax: None** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. **Other Considerations** When choosing between these two approaches, consider the trade-offs between performance, code readability, and added dependencies. If you need high-performance and don't mind adding an external dependency, `lodash.unique()` might be a better choice. However, if you prefer no external dependencies and are willing to write slightly more verbose code, converting a `Set` to an array using the spread operator is a viable alternative. **Other Alternatives** Some other alternatives for removing duplicates from an array in JavaScript include: * Using the `filter()` method with the `includes()` method: `[...array].filter((value) => !array.includes(value))` * Using the `reduce()` method with a callback function: `[...array].reduce((acc, value) => acc.includes(value) ? acc : [value], [])` However, these alternatives may not be as optimized for performance as the Lodash implementation or the native JavaScript approach using a `Set`.
Related benchmarks:
uniqBy vs stringify performance
Unique lodash vs vanilla
Lodash - uniq
Lodash union vs Native Javascript
lodash uniq vs spread new Set() medium size
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?