Benchmark: set vs lodash uniq vs custom unique 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

function unique(
  array,
  equals = Object.is,
) {
  const result = array.filter(
    (item, index, array) => array.findIndex((a) => equals(a, item)) === index,
  );
  return result.length === array.length ? array : result;
}

Tests:

Set
const l = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7]; return new Set(l);
Lodash uniq
const l = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7]; return _.uniq(l);
Custom unique
const l = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7]; return unique(l);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Set
Lodash uniq
Custom unique

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares three approaches to remove duplicates from an array: using the built-in `Set` object, Lodash's `uniq` function, and a custom implementation called `unique`.

**Options Compared**

1. **Built-in Set Object**: This approach uses the `Set` object to remove duplicates from the array.
2. **Lodash uniq**: This approach uses Lodash's `uniq` function, which is a utility function for removing duplicates from an array.
3. **Custom Unique Function**: This approach defines a custom `unique` function using JavaScript's `filter` method and the `findIndex` method.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Built-in Set Object**:
	* Pros: Fast and efficient, as it uses a hash table to store unique elements.
	* Cons: May not work well with non-numeric or non-string values, and may have performance issues with very large datasets.
2. **Lodash uniq**:
	* Pros: Robust and feature-rich, with support for various types of duplicates (e.g., array vs. object).
	* Cons: Adds an external dependency (Lodash), which may increase load times or bundle sizes.
3. **Custom Unique Function**:
	* Pros: Customizable and flexible, allowing developers to optimize performance or handle specific edge cases.
	* Cons: May have higher overhead due to the custom implementation, potentially affecting performance.

**Library and Features**

1. **Lodash uniq**: Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a wide range of functions for data manipulation, including `uniq`.
2. **Set Object**: The built-in Set object in JavaScript is used to store unique values, making it an efficient choice for removing duplicates.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None are mentioned in the benchmark definition or individual test cases.

**Other Alternatives**

1. **Array.prototype.filter()**: This method can be used to remove duplicates from an array using a custom implementation.
2. **Reduce() and Array.prototype.indexOf()**: Another approach to removing duplicates could involve using `reduce()` to iterate over the array and `indexOf()` to check for duplicate values.

In summary, the benchmark compares three approaches to remove duplicates from an array: using the built-in Set object, Lodash's uniq function, and a custom implementation. Each approach has its pros and cons, and understanding these differences can help developers choose the best solution for their specific use case.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Set	4358537.0 Ops/sec
Lodash uniq	6632406.0 Ops/sec
Custom unique	4498625.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

set vs lodash uniq vs custom unique 2 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Set vs Lodash uniq vs Custom unique

Created: 4 days ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Set

Lodash uniq

Custom unique

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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