Benchmark: Set to Array vs. lodash uniq

HTML Preparation code:

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

Tests:

Set -> Array
var l = new Set([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7]); var ll = Array.from(l); return ll;
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 -> Array
Lodash uniq

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/128.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 128 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Set -> Array	4848081.0 Ops/sec
Lodash uniq	11669711.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition and Test Cases**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that provides metadata about the test case, including its name, description, script preparation code, and HTML preparation code. In this case, we have two test cases:

1. "Set -> Array": This test case creates a new Set object with 14 identical elements (7 times) and then converts it to an array using `Array.from()`.
2. "Lodash uniq": This test case uses the Lodash library to remove duplicates from an array.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Converting a Set to an Array**: Using `Set` object to store unique elements and then converting it to an array using `Array.from()`.
2. **Using Lodash uniq function**: Using the `uniq()` function from the Lodash library to remove duplicates from an array.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Converting a Set to an Array**:
	* Pros: Sets are designed for fast membership testing, so this approach can be faster for small sets.
	* Cons: Converting a set to an array requires additional memory allocation and can be slower for large sets.
2. **Using Lodash uniq function**:
	* Pros: Lodash provides optimized implementation for removing duplicates, which can be faster than implementing it manually.
	* Cons: Requires an external library (Lodash) to be loaded, which may add overhead.

**Library and Its Purpose**

The `lodash` library is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more. In this case, the `uniq()` function is used to remove duplicates from an array.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There doesn't appear to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being used in these test cases.

**Other Considerations**

* **Memory Allocation**: Both approaches require memory allocation for the set and array, respectively.
* **Performance**: The performance of both approaches can depend on factors like the size of the input data, the number of unique elements, and the efficiency of the `Array.from()` method.

**Alternatives**

If you want to explore alternative approaches or libraries, here are a few options:

1. Use `Array.prototype.filter()` instead of Lodash `uniq()`.
2. Implement your own duplicate removal function using JavaScript.
3. Try using other array manipulation functions like `Array.prototype.slice()` or `Array.prototype.concat()`.
4. Explore other libraries like `underscore` (which is similar to Lodash) or `fastest` (a performance-focused library).

By considering these factors and alternatives, you can gain a deeper understanding of the trade-offs involved in choosing an approach for duplicate removal in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

Set to Array vs. lodash uniq (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Set -> Array vs Lodash uniq

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Set -> Array

Lodash uniq

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):