Benchmark: lodash uniq vs VanillaJS

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

function getStrings() {
  const generatedStrings = [];
  for (let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
    generatedStrings.push(
      Math.random()
        .toString(36)
        .replace(/[^a-z0-9]+/g, '')
    );
  }
  return generatedStrings;
}

Tests:

lodash way
return _.uniq(getStrings());
VanillaJS Set + spread
return [...new Set(getStrings())];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash way
VanillaJS Set + spread

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 24 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for removing duplicates from an array of strings: using Lodash's `uniq` function and using a vanilla JavaScript `Set` combined with the spread operator (`...`).

**Options Compared**

1. **Lodash `uniq`**: This function takes an array as input and returns a new array with unique elements, preserving the original order.
2. **VanillaJS `Set + spread`**: This approach creates a new `Set` from the input array using the spread operator (`...`) to convert it into an iterable, and then converts it back into an array using the spread operator again.

**Pros and Cons**

**Lodash `uniq`:**

Pros:

* Preserves original order of elements
* Returns a new array with unique elements

Cons:

* Requires Lodash library to be included in the benchmark
* May have slower performance due to function call overhead

**VanillaJS `Set + spread`:**

Pros:

* Lightweight and fast, as it only uses built-in JavaScript features
* No additional library dependencies required

Cons:

* Preserves original order of elements is not guaranteed (elements may be re-ordered during set creation)
* May have slower performance due to set creation and iteration overhead

**Other Considerations**

Both approaches can work well for small to medium-sized input arrays, but the vanilla JavaScript approach may start to show performance advantages when dealing with larger inputs. However, if preserving original order is crucial, the Lodash `uniq` approach may be a better choice.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash (formerly known as "Underscore.js") is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of high-order functions for functional programming tasks, such as array manipulation, object transformation, and more. In this benchmark, the `uniq` function from Lodash is used to remove duplicates from an array.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntaxes being used in this benchmark, other than the use of arrow functions (`=>`) in some parts of the script preparation code.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:80.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/80.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 80 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash way	250.3 Ops/sec
VanillaJS Set + spread	242.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

lodash uniq vs VanillaJS (version: 0)

Taking only string arrays as input into consideration

Comparing performance of: lodash way vs VanillaJS Set + spread

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash way

VanillaJS Set + spread

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 24 days ago):