Benchmark: lodash uniq vs Array.from(new Set)

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 Array.from(l)
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
uniq

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and analyzed.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares two approaches to remove duplicates from an array:

1. Using JavaScript's built-in `Set` object (`"Set"` test case)
2. Using the popular utility library Lodash's `uniq()` function (`"uniq"` test case)

**Comparison of Approaches**

**Using JavaScript's Set Object (Set)**

* The `Set` object is used to create a collection of unique values.
* When adding elements to a `Set`, duplicates are automatically ignored.
* After creating the `Set`, the `Array.from()` method is used to convert it back into an array, which contains only unique values.

**Using Lodash's uniq() Function (uniq)**

* The `uniq()` function from Lodash takes an array as input and returns a new array with duplicates removed.
* This approach relies on the library's implementation of uniqueness detection.

**Pros and Cons**

### Using JavaScript's Set Object (Set)

Pros:

* Built-in functionality, so no additional dependencies are required.
* Fast and efficient, as sets use a hash table for storage.

Cons:

* Requires that the input array contains only values that can be hashed, which might not be the case for all types of data.
* The `Array.from()` method is used to convert the set back into an array, which might incur additional overhead.

### Using Lodash's uniq() Function (uniq)

Pros:

* Convenient and easy to use, as it's a part of a popular utility library.
* Handles various types of input arrays with different data structures.

Cons:

* Adds an external dependency on the Lodash library.
* Might be slower than using the built-in `Set` object due to the overhead of function calls and possible caching effects.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for common programming tasks, such as data manipulation, string manipulation, and more. The `uniq()` function is one of its many utilities that helps remove duplicates from arrays.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax: None mentioned**

As there are no special features or syntaxes being used in this benchmark, we can focus on the comparison between the two approaches without delving into specific language features.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to Lodash's `uniq()` function, some popular options include:

* The built-in `filter()` method with a callback function that checks for duplicates.
* Other utility libraries like Underscore.js or Ramda.js.
* Custom implementation of uniqueness detection using JavaScript's built-in functions.

Keep in mind that the choice of alternative will depend on your specific requirements and performance considerations.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 116 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Set	3255496.0 Ops/sec
uniq	8145792.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

lodash uniq vs Array.from(new Set) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Set vs uniq

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Set

uniq

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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