Benchmark: Lodash "uniqWith" "uniqBy" 8

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var newUsers = [
  { 'name': 'fred',    'age': 40 },
  { 'name': 'barney',  'age': 36 },
  { 'name': 'pebbles', 'age': 2 }
];

for(let i = 0; i < 2000; i++) {
  var newUser = { 'name': 'user_' + i, 'age': Math.floor(Math.random() * i) };
  newUsers.push(newUser);
}

Tests:

uniqWith
const unionUsers1 = _.uniqWith(newUsers, (a, b) => a.name === b.name && a.age === b.age);
uniqBy Join
const unionUsers1 = _.uniqBy(newUsers, v => [v.name, v.age].join('-'));
uniqBy Stringify
const unionUsers1 = _.uniqBy(newUsers, v => JSON.stringify([v.name, v.age]));
uniqBy Stringify Pick
const unionUsers1 = _.uniqBy(newUsers, v => JSON.stringify(_.pick(v, ['name', 'age'])));
uniqBy Join map pick
const unionUsers1 = _.uniqBy(newUsers, v => (['name', 'age'].map(n => v[n])).join('-'));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
uniqWith
uniqBy Join
uniqBy Stringify
uniqBy Stringify Pick
uniqBy Join map pick

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 what's being tested on MeasureThat.net.

**Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website where users can create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks to compare the performance of different approaches for various tasks. In this case, we're analyzing a benchmark that tests the "uniqBy" function from Lodash, which is a utility library for functional programming in JavaScript.

**Options being compared**

The benchmark compares four different approaches for implementing `uniqBy`:

1. **Join**: This approach concatenates two values (in this case, `name` and `age`) into a single string using the `join()` method.
2. **Map Pick**: This approach uses an array of property names (`['name', 'age']`) and maps each value to its corresponding index in that array. It then joins the resulting arrays together with dashes.
3. **Stringify Pick**: This approach serializes the entire object using `JSON.stringify()` and only includes two properties: `name` and `age`.
4. **uniqWith** (Lodash): This is a built-in function from Lodash that allows you to specify a custom comparator function for unique filtering.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

1. **Join**: Pros:
	* Simple implementation.
	* Fast execution.
Cons:
	* May not be efficient if dealing with large arrays or complex data structures.
2. **Map Pick**: Pros:
	* Efficient use of array indices.
	* Allows for easy extension to other properties.
Cons:
	* More complex implementation compared to Join.
3. **Stringify Pick**: Pros:
	* Convenient way to serialize objects while only including specific properties.
Cons:
	* May lead to slower execution due to the overhead of `JSON.stringify()`.
4. **uniqWith** (Lodash): Pros:
	* Fast and efficient, optimized for performance by Lodash.
Cons:
	* Requires an additional dependency on Lodash.

**Other considerations**

When implementing `uniqBy`, consider the following:

* Data structure: If dealing with large arrays or complex data structures, consider using a more efficient approach like Map Pick or Join.
* Performance requirements: If requiring extremely fast performance, consider using `uniqWith` (Lodash) or optimizing your own implementation.
* Code readability and maintainability: Choose an approach that balances complexity and simplicity for your use case.

**Library usage**

The benchmark uses Lodash, a popular utility library for functional programming in JavaScript. Lodash provides a wide range of functions and helpers for tasks like string manipulation, array operations, and object iteration. In this case, `uniqBy` is used to filter unique elements based on a custom property.

**Special JS features or syntax**

None mentioned in the provided benchmark definition or results.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
uniqWith	176.4 Ops/sec
uniqBy Join	4471.7 Ops/sec
uniqBy Stringify	2703.6 Ops/sec
uniqBy Stringify Pick	1023.4 Ops/sec
uniqBy Join map pick	3913.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Lodash "uniqWith" "uniqBy" 8 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: uniqWith vs uniqBy Join vs uniqBy Stringify vs uniqBy Stringify Pick vs uniqBy Join map pick

Created: 3 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

uniqWith

uniqBy Join

uniqBy Stringify

uniqBy Stringify Pick

uniqBy Join map pick

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):