<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js'></script>
var arr = [Array(50).keys()].flatMap(a => [Array(20).keys()])
var l = [new Set(arr)];
return l;
var l = arr;
return _.uniq(l);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Set | |
Array |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Set | 84360.5 Ops/sec |
Array | 88294.2 Ops/sec |
Benchmark Overview
The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case for measuring the performance of two approaches: using Array.prototype.sort()
with a Set
object (approach A) and using Lodash's uniq()
function (approach B). The benchmark aims to determine which approach is faster.
Options Compared
The benchmark compares two options:
uniq()
functionuniq()
function from Lodash to remove duplicate elements from the original array.Pros and Cons
Pros:
uniq()
since it avoids the overhead of a JavaScript function call.Cons:
uniq()
)Pros:
Cons:
Other Considerations
Array.prototype.sort()
to sort the keys, which may not be the most efficient sorting algorithm for large datasets. Other sorting algorithms like quicksort or mergesort might be more suitable.Library Used (Lodash)
The uniq()
function from Lodash is used to remove duplicate elements from the original array. This library provides a convenient and efficient way to perform common array operations like filtering, mapping, and sorting.
If you're interested in implementing similar functionality without using an external library, you can create your own implementation of uniq()
or use other JavaScript libraries like jQuery.
Special JS Feature/Syntax
There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. The test case only uses standard JavaScript syntax for creating arrays and sets, as well as the Lodash library for its uniq()
function.
Alternatives
If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to this benchmark, here are some options:
Array.prototype.sort()
.IntMap
(a map where keys are integers) to improve performance for large datasets.Keep in mind that these alternatives might require more code and may have different trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and maintainability.