Benchmark: Immutable.Set Union vs Constructing a new plain JS Set - small

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/immutable/3.8.2/immutable.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/immutability-helper@2.7.0/index.min.js"></script>

Tests:

Immutable.Set union
const set1_Immutable = new Immutable.Set(Array.from(Array(100).keys())); const set2_Immutable = new Immutable.Set(Array.from(Array(20).keys())); const result = set1_Immutable.union(set2_Immutable)
Convert JS Set to array, construct new Set
const set1_JS = new Set(Array.from(Array(100).keys())); const set2_JS = new Set(Array.from(Array(20).keys())); const result = new Set([...set1_JS, ...set2_JS])
Array.from, construct new Set
const set1_JS = new Set(Array.from(Array(100).keys())); const set2_JS = new Set(Array.from(Array(20).keys())); const result = new Set(Array.from(set1_JS).concat(Array.from(set2_JS)))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Immutable.Set union
Convert JS Set to array, construct new Set
Array.from, construct new Set

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three approaches for performing set unions in JavaScript:

1. Using the Immutable.js library
2. Converting the sets to arrays and constructing new sets using the spread operator (`...`)
3. Using `Array.from()` to convert one of the sets to an array, then concatenating it with the other set

**Immutable.js Library**

The Immutable.js library is a JavaScript library for functional programming that provides immutable data structures, such as sets. In this benchmark, the Immutable.js library is used to create two sets (`set1_Immutable` and `set2_Immutable`) and perform an union operation on them.

Pros of using Immutable.js:

* Provides a predictable and deterministic way of performing set operations
* Can help prevent common errors that can occur when working with mutable data structures

Cons of using Immutable.js:

* Adds extra overhead due to the creation of new, immutable data structures
* May not be suitable for all use cases where performance is critical

**Converting Sets to Arrays and Constructing New Sets**

This approach involves converting one or both of the sets to arrays using `Array.from()`, then using the spread operator (`...`) to concatenate the arrays and construct a new set.

Pros of this approach:

* Does not require any additional libraries
* Can be optimized for performance by avoiding unnecessary memory allocations

Cons of this approach:

* May lead to slower performance compared to other approaches due to the overhead of array conversions
* Requires manual error handling to ensure that the resulting set is correctly constructed

**Array.from() and Concatenation**

This approach involves using `Array.from()` to convert one of the sets to an array, then concatenating it with the other set using the `+` operator.

Pros of this approach:

* Does not require any additional libraries
* Can be optimized for performance by avoiding unnecessary memory allocations

Cons of this approach:

* May lead to slower performance compared to other approaches due to the overhead of array conversions and concatenation
* Requires manual error handling to ensure that the resulting set is correctly constructed

**Other Considerations**

* Memory allocation: The benchmark measures the number of executions per second, which can be affected by memory allocation. The Immutable.js library may perform better in terms of memory allocation compared to other approaches.
* Cache locality: The performance difference between these approaches may also depend on cache locality, as the JavaScript engine optimizes access patterns for arrays.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for set operations include:

* Using the `Set` class's built-in union method (`set1.set(set2)`)
* Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Ramda, which provide a broader range of functional programming utilities, including set operations.
* Implementing custom set operations using native JavaScript features, such as iterators and generators.

These alternatives may offer different trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and maintainability, depending on the specific use case.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/99.0.4844.74 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 99 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Immutable.Set union	45868.6 Ops/sec
Convert JS Set to array, construct new Set	78503.3 Ops/sec
Array.from, construct new Set	83535.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Immutable.Set Union vs Constructing a new plain JS Set - small (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Immutable.Set union vs Convert JS Set to array, construct new Set vs Array.from, construct new Set

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Immutable.Set union

Convert JS Set to array, construct new Set

Array.from, construct new Set

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):