Benchmark: lodash uniq vs set vs indexof

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 unique
var l = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7]; return _.uniq(l);
Index Of
var l = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7]; return l.filter(function(elem, pos) { return l.indexOf(elem) == pos; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Set
Lodash unique
Index Of

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Set	9488148.0 Ops/sec
Lodash unique	24356136.0 Ops/sec
Index Of	10822368.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three approaches to remove duplicates from an array:

1. **Set**: Using a built-in JavaScript `Set` object, which automatically removes duplicates.
2. **Lodash unique**: Utilizing the `uniq` function from the popular utility library Lodash.
3. **Index Of**: Implementing a custom solution using `filter` and `indexOf` methods.

**What is being tested?**

In each test case:

* A large array with multiple instances of the same element (e.g., `[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, ...]`) is created.
* The benchmark measures how long it takes to run each test case.

**Options Compared**

The three options are compared in terms of their execution time:

| Option | Description |
| --- | --- |
| Set | Using a built-in JavaScript `Set` object to remove duplicates. |
| Lodash unique | Utilizing the `uniq` function from Lodash, a popular utility library. |
| Index Of | Implementing a custom solution using `filter` and `indexOf` methods. |

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Set**:
	* Pros: Simple, efficient, and reliable.
	* Cons: Requires a JavaScript `Set` object, which might not be available in older browsers or Node.js versions.
2. **Lodash unique**:
	* Pros: Well-maintained, widely used, and provides additional utility functions.
	* Cons: Adds external library dependencies, which may increase bundle size and overhead.
3. **Index Of**:
	* Pros: Custom solution can be optimized for specific use cases or performance characteristics.
	* Cons: More complex implementation, potentially slower due to the use of `filter` and `indexOf`.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as:

* String manipulation
* Array operations (e.g., `uniq`, `map`, `reduce`)
* Object manipulation
* Math and number utilities

In this benchmark, the `uniq` function from Lodash is used to remove duplicates from an array.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanation. The code only relies on standard JavaScript language features.

**Alternatives**

If you need to remove duplicates from an array, other alternatives could be:

* Using `Array.prototype.filter()` and checking for the existence of each element in the original array using `in` operator.
* Utilizing a third-party library like Ramda or Underscore.js (similar to Lodash).
* Implementing a custom solution using a data structure like a hash table or a trie.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on the specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

lodash uniq vs set vs indexof (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Set vs Lodash unique vs Index Of

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Set

Lodash unique

Index Of

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):