Benchmark: lodash uniq vs set 1234567890

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js'></script>

Tests:

Set
var l = new Set(['SUI', 'USDC', 'XRP', 'USDT', 'ETH', 'USDC', 'ALPHA', 'USDT', 'SOL', 'USDC', 'NZD', 'USDG', 'WHALE', 'USDT', 'FDT', 'USDT', 'SOL', 'USDT', 'SOL', 'BTC', 'BTC', 'IDRT', 'FUSDC', 'USDC', 'USDT', 'BNB', 'BOT', 'USDT', 'HODL', 'USDT', 'BNB', 'USDT', 'USDT', 'USDC', 'HXD', 'USDC', 'XRP-USDT', 'XRP-USDT-SWAP', 'XLM', 'USDT', 'XRP', 'SGD', 'BTC', 'USDC', '1000PEPE', 'USDV', 'XRP', 'USD', 'BNB', 'USDG', 'TRX', 'USDT', 'MATIC', 'DAI', 'USDT', 'USD', 'THX', 'USDC', 'ETH', 'DAI', 'BTC', 'USD', 'MECHA', 'USDC', 'BNB', 'USD', 'TCG2', 'BNB', 'PKN', 'USDC', 'BNB', 'BUSD', 'ETH', 'USDT', 'BTEX', 'EUR', 'USN', 'USDT', 'BTC', 'EUR', 'BNB', 'USDC', 'XRP', 'EUR']); return l;
Array
var l = ['SUI', 'USDC', 'XRP', 'USDT', 'ETH', 'USDC', 'ALPHA', 'USDT', 'SOL', 'USDC', 'NZD', 'USDG', 'WHALE', 'USDT', 'FDT', 'USDT', 'SOL', 'USDT', 'SOL', 'BTC', 'BTC', 'IDRT', 'FUSDC', 'USDC', 'USDT', 'BNB', 'BOT', 'USDT', 'HODL', 'USDT', 'BNB', 'USDT', 'USDT', 'USDC', 'HXD', 'USDC', 'XRP-USDT', 'XRP-USDT-SWAP', 'XLM', 'USDT', 'XRP', 'SGD', 'BTC', 'USDC', '1000PEPE', 'USDV', 'XRP', 'USD', 'BNB', 'USDG', 'TRX', 'USDT', 'MATIC', 'DAI', 'USDT', 'USD', 'THX', 'USDC', 'ETH', 'DAI', 'BTC', 'USD', 'MECHA', 'USDC', 'BNB', 'USD', 'TCG2', 'BNB', 'PKN', 'USDC', 'BNB', 'BUSD', 'ETH', 'USDT', 'BTEX', 'EUR', 'USN', 'USDT', 'BTC', 'EUR', 'BNB', 'USDC', 'XRP', 'EUR']; return _.uniq(l);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Set
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 break down what's being tested in the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Purpose:**
The purpose of this benchmark is to compare the performance of two approaches for creating a unique array of strings:

1. Using a `Set` data structure (JavaScript's built-in Set object)
2. Using the `_.uniq()` function from the Lodash library

**Options Compared:**

* **Set**: Creating a Set from an array of strings and using its `size` property to get the number of unique elements.
* **Array**: Using the Lodash library's `_.uniq()` function, which creates a new array with only unique elements.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Set**:
	+ Pros: Simple, efficient, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: Requires JavaScript to be set up as a Set, which might incur additional overhead.
* **Array**: Pros: Convenient, easy to understand, and doesn't require setting up a Set. Cons: Might have performance overhead due to the creation of an intermediate array.

**Library Used:** Lodash
Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, object transformation, and more. The `_.uniq()` function is one of its many useful utilities.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax:**
None mentioned in this specific benchmark.

**Other Alternatives:** If you wanted to create an array with unique elements without using Lodash's `_.uniq()`, you could use the `Array.prototype.reduce()` method and a Set to achieve the same result. Alternatively, you could use a library like MathJS or other specialized libraries for mathematical computations.

In terms of benchmarking, it's worth noting that this test compares the performance of two approaches:

1. Using the built-in Set object (JavaScript).
2. Using Lodash's `_.uniq()` function (a third-party library).

By comparing these two approaches, the benchmark aims to provide insight into the performance benefits of using a dedicated library versus relying on the language's built-in features.

To get a better understanding of your specific use case, consider what trade-offs are important to you. If you need high performance and don't mind using an external library, Lodash might be a good choice. However, if you prefer to avoid additional dependencies or want to keep things simple, the Set approach might be more suitable.

Related benchmarks:

lodash uniq vs set 1234567890 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Set vs Array

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Set

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):