Benchmark: Lodash difference vs Set & Filter (once)

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var arr1 = [];
for(let i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
  arr1.push('' + i);
}

var arr2 = [];
for(let i = 49; i >= 0; i--) {
  arr2.push('' + i);
}

Tests:

Lodash
const notInArr = _.difference(arr2, arr1)
Set & Filter
const arr2Set = new Set(); arr2.forEach(value => arr2Set.add(value)); const notInArr2 = arr1.filter(value => !arr2Set.has(value));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Set & Filter

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/113.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 113 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	42817.4 Ops/sec
Set & Filter	342209.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between using Lodash's `difference` function and creating an array with Set data structure followed by filtering (using `filter()` method) for finding elements not present in the first array (`arr1`) versus a second array (`arr2`). The arrays `arr1` and `arr2` are populated with ascending numbers.

**Options Compared**

Two approaches are compared:

1. **Lodash**: Using Lodash's `difference` function to find elements that are in `arr1` but not in `arr2`.
2. **Set & Filter**: Creating a Set data structure from `arr2` and using the `filter()` method to find elements present in `arr1`.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

### Lodash

Pros:

* Shorter code, as it provides a built-in function for finding differences.
* May be faster due to optimized JavaScript engine's capabilities.

Cons:

* External dependency on Lodash library, which can introduce overhead (e.g., HTTP request, loading time).
* Might not be suitable for environments without access to the library.

### Set & Filter

Pros:

* No external dependencies required.
* Allows for direct manipulation of arrays and Sets using built-in JavaScript methods.

Cons:

* Longer code, as it requires creating a Set from `arr2` and then filtering `arr1`.
* May be slower due to additional operations (creating a Set and then filtering).

**Library Used: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a collection of functions and methods for various tasks, including array manipulation. In this benchmark, Lodash's `difference` function is used to find elements present in `arr1` but not in `arr2`.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in the benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches, here are a few:

* Using `indexOf()` method on each element of one array to check if an element exists in another array.
* Creating a new array with only the elements that meet the condition using Array.prototype.map().
* Utilizing modern JavaScript features like `forEach()` and `includes()` (if supported) for filtering.

Keep in mind that performance can vary depending on specific use cases, browser versions, and system configurations. The choice of approach ultimately depends on your project requirements, performance constraints, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash difference vs Set & Filter (once) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Set & Filter

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Set & Filter

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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