Benchmark: uniq-vs-uniqWith

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var workOrders = _.range(_.random(100)).map(x => _.random(1, 10));

Tests:

_.uniq()
_.uniq(workOrders);
_.uniqWith
_.uniqWith(workOrders);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.uniq()
_.uniqWith

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches for extracting unique items from an array: `_.uniq()` and `_.uniqWith()`. The goal is to measure which approach performs better in terms of execution speed.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates a random array of 100 elements, each with a random value between 1 and 10:
```javascript
var workOrders = _.range(_.random(100)).map(x => _.random(1, 10));
```
This is the input data used for both test cases.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code includes a reference to Lodash version 4.17.5, which provides the `_.uniq()` and `_.uniqWith()` functions:
```html
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
```
**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition json contains two test cases:

1. **_.uniq()**
	* Benchmark Definition: `_.uniq(workOrders)`
	* Test Name: `_.uniq()`

This test case measures the execution speed of the `_.uniq()` function, which removes duplicates from an array.

2. **_.uniqWith()**
	* Benchmark Definition: `_.uniqWith(workOrders)`
	* Test Name: `_.uniqWith`

This test case measures the execution speed of the `_.uniqWith()` function, which removes duplicates from an array using a custom function as the first argument.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

1. **_.uniq()**
	* Pros:
		+ Simple to use
		+ Fast (most optimized implementation)
	* Cons:
		+ Only works with arrays, not other data structures
		+ Does not provide any customization options for the duplicate removal process
2. **_.uniqWith()**
	* Pros:
		+ More flexible than _.uniq()
		+ Can be used with various data structures (e.g., strings, objects)
	* Cons:
		+ Slower than _.uniq() due to additional function invocation overhead
		+ Requires more code and thought to set up the custom function

**Library and Purpose**

Lodash is a utility library for JavaScript that provides a wide range of functions for common tasks, such as array manipulation (`_.uniq()` and `_.uniqWith()`), string manipulation (`_.chain()`, etc.), and more. Lodash is often used in web development to simplify code and improve performance.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark. However, the use of a custom function with `_.uniqWith()` implies that the developer has some knowledge of functional programming concepts.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for removing duplicates from an array include:

1. **Array.prototype.filter()**: Removes duplicate elements by filtering the array and keeping only unique values.
```javascript
var workOrders = [...new Set(workOrders)];
```
2. **Set data structure**: Stores unique elements in a set, allowing for efficient lookup and removal of duplicates.
```javascript
var workOrders = new Set(workOrders);
```
3. **Custom implementation using `forEach()` and a temporary array**:
```javascript
var uniqueWorkOrders = [];
workOrders.forEach((element) => {
  if (!uniqueWorkOrders.includes(element)) {
    uniqueWorkOrders.push(element);
  }
});
```
These alternatives have different performance characteristics, trade-offs, and use cases compared to Lodash's `_.uniq()` and `_.uniqWith()`.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.146 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
_.uniq()	1336947.4 Ops/sec
_.uniqWith	1243616.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

uniq-vs-uniqWith (version: 0)

Compare different ways of extracting unique items

Comparing performance of: _.uniq() vs _.uniqWith

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.uniq()

_.uniqWith

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):