Benchmark: Lodash union() vs native Set() for unique primitives

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var a = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
var b = [3, 4, 5, 6, 7]

Tests:

_.union vs set for unique primitives
var c = _.union(a, b)
Set()
var c = [...new Set(a, b)]
Set() convert back to array
var c = new Set(a, b) var d = Array.from(c)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.union vs set for unique primitives
Set()
Set() convert back to array

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 dive into the benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is comparing three approaches to union (combine) two arrays of primitive values:

1. Using Lodash's `union()` function
2. Using the native JavaScript `Set` data structure and converting it back to an array using `Array.from()`
3. Using the native JavaScript `Set` data structure without converting it back to an array

**Options compared**

The benchmark is comparing two main approaches:

* **Lodash's `union()` function**: This approach uses a third-party library (Lodash) to perform the union operation.
* **Native JavaScript `Set` with conversion**: This approach uses the native JavaScript `Set` data structure to store unique values and then converts it back to an array using `Array.from()`. This approach is built-in to JavaScript.

**Pros and Cons**

**Lodash's `union()` function:**

Pros:

* Easy to use and understand, as it's a well-known library with a simple API.
* May be faster due to optimization by the Lodash team.

Cons:

* Requires including an external library, which may increase page load time.
* May introduce additional overhead due to the extra library.

**Native JavaScript `Set` with conversion:**

Pros:

* No additional dependencies or page load time.
* Built-in to JavaScript, so it's a native implementation.

Cons:

* Can be less intuitive to use, as it requires understanding of the `Set` data structure and its methods.
* May be slower due to the overhead of creating and manipulating the `Set` object.

**Other considerations**

* The benchmark is using Chrome 111 on Windows Desktop, so the results may not be representative for other browsers or platforms.
* The use of Lodash's `union()` function might introduce additional variability in the results, as it depends on the specific version of Lodash used.
* The conversion from `Set` to an array using `Array.from()` might introduce additional overhead due to the extra method call.

**Library and its purpose**

In this benchmark, the library is Lodash, a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as string manipulation, array manipulation, and more. The `union()` function in particular is used to combine two arrays into one, removing duplicates.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There isn't any special JS feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It's purely about comparing different approaches to unioning arrays of primitive values.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash union() vs native Set() for unique primitives (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.union vs set for unique primitives vs Set() vs Set() convert back to array

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.union vs set for unique primitives

Set()

Set() convert back to array

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):