Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash uniqWith vs Set
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lodash vs set
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
Tests:
lodash
const target = []; for (let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { const newObj = {}; newObj[`${String.fromCharCode(i)}`] = { a: i } target.push( newObj ) } return _.uniq(target);
set
const target = []; for (let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { const newObj = {}; newObj[`${String.fromCharCode(i)}`] = { a: i } target.push( newObj ) } return [...new Set(target)];
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lodash
set
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):
Measuring performance differences between two approaches is essential to understand which one is more efficient in real-world scenarios. The provided JSON represents a benchmark test on MeasureThat.net, comparing the performance of `lodash uniqWith` and `Set`. Here's an explanation of the tested options: **Lodash `uniqWith`** * The `uniqWith` function is a part of the Lodash library, which provides a set of useful functions for functional programming in JavaScript. * In this benchmark, `uniqWith` is used to remove duplicates from an array. Specifically, it uses a compare function that checks if two objects are equal based on their values. **Set** * The `Set` data structure is a built-in JavaScript object that stores unique elements. * In this benchmark, an array of objects is created and then converted to a `Set`. This process automatically removes duplicates because sets only store unique values. Now, let's discuss the pros and cons of each approach: **Lodash `uniqWith`** Pros: * Provides more flexibility in terms of comparison functions, allowing for custom logic to be applied when removing duplicates. * Can handle complex objects with nested properties. Cons: * May have a higher overhead due to the additional function call and the need to create a compare function. * Requires an external library (Lodash) to be included. **Set** Pros: * Has a lower overhead because it's a native JavaScript data structure. * Does not require any external libraries or functions. Cons: * Can only handle primitive values and objects with a single property (i.e., `{ prop: value }`). * May have performance issues when dealing with very large datasets. Other considerations: * In terms of performance, `Set` is likely to be faster because it's a native data structure. * However, `lodash uniqWith` provides more flexibility and can handle more complex objects, making it a better choice for certain use cases. Regarding special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark, there isn't any specific feature or syntax being highlighted. The focus is on the performance comparison between two approaches. If you're interested in exploring alternative libraries or approaches, here are some options: * For duplicate removal: `lodash uniq`, `lodash compact`, or `Array.prototype.filter()` * For sets and uniqueness checks: `Set`, `Map`, or `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj)).includes(obj)` * For functional programming: Libraries like Ramda or Underscore.js provide a wide range of functions for data manipulation and processing. Keep in mind that the choice of library or approach depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.
Related benchmarks:
lodash uniq vs native uniq
uniqBy vs stringify performance
Lodash - uniq
uniqBy performance lodash vs native
Lodash uniqBy vs Javascript uniqBy
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?