Benchmark: lodash uniq vs set b

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;
lodash 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>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Set
lodash 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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to removing duplicates from an array: using the built-in `Set` object in JavaScript and utilizing the `uniq()` function from the Lodash library.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **"Set"`**: This test case uses the built-in `Set` object to remove duplicates from an array.
2. **"lodash uniq"`**: This test case uses the `uniq()` function from the Lodash library to remove duplicates from an array.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

* Using the built-in `Set` object in JavaScript
* Using the `uniq()` function from the Lodash library

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Using the built-in `Set` object:**

Pros:

* Fast and efficient, as it uses a hash table to store unique elements.
* Low memory overhead, as it only stores unique elements.

Cons:

* Limited functionality compared to other data structures like arrays or objects.
* May not be suitable for complex data structures or multiple-value sets.

**Using the `uniq()` function from Lodash:**

Pros:

* Provides a more functional programming approach, making it easier to work with arrays and remove duplicates in a declarative way.
* Can handle more complex data structures, such as nested arrays or objects.
* Includes additional features like sorting and stability, which can be useful in certain scenarios.

Cons:

* May have higher overhead compared to the built-in `Set` object due to the need for additional logic and function calls.
* Requires an external library (Lodash), adding dependency and potential maintenance costs.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses a relatively small input array of 14 elements, which may not be representative of real-world scenarios where arrays can be much larger.
* There is no consideration for the specific requirements or constraints of the use case, such as performance, memory usage, or data structure complexity.
* The benchmark does not provide any additional metrics, such as error rates, cache hits, or false positives, which could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the differences between these two approaches.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to removing duplicates from an array include:

* Using `Array.prototype.filter()`: This method can be used in combination with other methods like `Array.prototype.every()` and `Array.prototype.includes()` to remove duplicates.
* Using `Array.prototype.reduce()`: This method can be used to accumulate unique elements into a new array, but may have higher overhead compared to the built-in `Set` object or Lodash's `uniq()` function.

It's worth noting that the choice of approach ultimately depends on the specific requirements and constraints of the use case.

Related benchmarks:

lodash uniq vs set b (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Set vs lodash uniq

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Set

lodash uniq

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):