Benchmark: Lodash vs Set - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var a = ['a', 'b', 'c'];
var b = ['b', 'd', 'a', 'e', 'f'];

var customUnion = (x, y) => {
    const existSet = new Set(x)
    const res = [...x]
    y.forEach((z) => {if (!existSet.has(z)) { res.push(z) }})
    return res
}

Tests:

Lodash union
var c = _.union(a, b).join(' ');
Js set
var c = [...new Set([...a ,...b])].join(' ');
custom union
var c = customUnion(a,b).join(' ')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash union
Js set
custom union

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 in the provided JSON.

The benchmark is comparing three approaches to union (merge) two arrays:

1. **Lodash's `_.union()` method**: This function takes two arrays as input and returns a new array containing all unique elements from both arrays. The implementation used here is the 4.17.5 version of Lodash.
2. **JavaScript's built-in `Set` data structure**: A Set is an object that stores unique values, which can be used to eliminate duplicates when merging two arrays. This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a new array from the elements in one of the input arrays, and then iterates over the other array to add any new elements.
3. **Custom union function**: A custom JavaScript function defined by the user, which achieves the same goal as Lodash's `_.union()` method but with a different implementation.

Now, let's discuss the pros and cons of each approach:

* **Lodash's `_.union()` method**:
	+ Pros: Well-tested and widely used, so you can rely on its performance and behavior.
	+ Cons: Additional dependency on Lodash, which might add overhead to your project. Also, this implementation uses a proprietary algorithm that might not be easily understandable or optimized by others.
* **JavaScript's built-in `Set` data structure**:
	+ Pros: Native support, so it doesn't require any additional dependencies. The implementation is relatively simple and easy to understand. Additionally, you can use other Set-related methods (e.g., `_.union()` alternatives like `Array.from(set).concat()`) to achieve similar results.
	+ Cons: Might be slower than Lodash's optimized implementation due to the overhead of creating a new array from the Set.
* **Custom union function**:
	+ Pros: Gives you complete control over the implementation and optimization. You can tailor it to your specific use case or performance requirements.
	+ Cons: Requires more effort and expertise to implement correctly, as it's not a standard library function.

The custom union function is an interesting approach, but it also introduces the following considerations:

* **Performance**: While you have fine-grained control over the implementation, this can sometimes result in slower performance compared to optimized libraries like Lodash.
* **Code readability and maintainability**: With a custom implementation, others might struggle to understand or update the code, especially if it's complex or uses non-standard techniques.

In general, for most use cases, JavaScript's built-in `Set` data structure is a good choice due to its simplicity, performance, and widespread adoption. However, if you have specific requirements that necessitate a custom implementation, the pros of this approach outweigh the cons.

As for other alternatives, some options could include:

* Using a different library or implementation, such as `lodash-es` (a ES6-compatible version of Lodash) or `ramda`.
* Implementing a union function using a different data structure, like an array with duplicate checks.
* Utilizing modern JavaScript features like `Array.prototype.filter()` and `Set.prototype.add()` to create the union.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own trade-offs and requirements.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Android 13; Mobile; rv:129.0) Gecko/129.0 Firefox/129.0

Browser/OS: Firefox Mobile 129 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash union	1187672.1 Ops/sec
Js set	403669.3 Ops/sec
custom union	773478.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Lodash vs Set (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash union vs Js set vs custom union

Created: 2 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash union

Js set

custom union

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):