Benchmark: Lodash difference vs Set

HTML Preparation code:

	<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

const currentSubscriberIds = ['user1', 'user2', 'user3', 'user4', 'user5'];
const newSubscriberIds = ['user3', 'user4', 'user5', 'user6', 'user7'];

Tests:

Lodash
const subscribersToAdd = _.difference(newSubscriberIds, currentSubscriberIds); const subscribersToRemove = _.difference(currentSubscriberIds, newSubscriberIds);
Set
const currentSubscribersSet = new Set(currentSubscriberIds); const newSubscribersSet = new Set(newSubscriberIds); const subscribersToAddSet = [...new Set(newSubscriberIds)] .filter(id => !currentSubscribersSet.has(id)); // ['user6', 'user7'] const subscribersToRemoveSet = [...currentSubscribersSet] .filter(id => !newSubscribersSet.has(id)); // ['user1', 'user2']

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Set

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	1922442.9 Ops/sec
Set	1948534.6 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark, named "Lodash difference vs Set," evaluates the performance of two different approaches for determining the differences between two arrays of user IDs: one using the Lodash library and the other using JavaScript's native `Set` data structure.

### Options Compared

1. **Lodash Approach**
   - **Benchmark Definition**: Utilizes the `_.difference` method provided by Lodash to find items in `newSubscriberIds` that are not in `currentSubscriberIds`, as well as the inverse.
     ```javascript
     const subscribersToAdd = _.difference(newSubscriberIds, currentSubscriberIds);
     const subscribersToRemove = _.difference(currentSubscriberIds, newSubscriberIds);
     ```
   - **Pros**:
     - **Simplicity**: Lodash provides a clear and expressive API which can make code easier to read and maintain.
     - **Functionality**: Lodash is a well-established utility library providing many features beyond array manipulation, making it an attractive option for complex applications.
   - **Cons**:
     - **Performance**: Usage of a library like Lodash can introduce overhead, making it potentially slower compared to native implementations, especially for simple use cases.
     - **Size**: Including external libraries can increase the size of the JavaScript bundle, which can affect load times in web applications.

2. **Set Approach**
   - **Benchmark Definition**: Involves creating two `Set` objects from the arrays and then using the `filter` method to find differences.
     ```javascript
     const currentSubscribersSet = new Set(currentSubscriberIds);
     const newSubscribersSet = new Set(newSubscriberIds);

const subscribersToAddSet = [...new Set(newSubscriberIds)]
       .filter(id => !currentSubscribersSet.has(id));

const subscribersToRemoveSet = [...currentSubscribersSet]
       .filter(id => !newSubscribersSet.has(id));
     ```
   - **Pros**:
     - **Performance**: The `Set` data structure provides O(1) time complexity for lookups, which can significantly enhance performance when dealing with large datasets.
     - **No Libraries Needed**: Using native JavaScript constructs avoids the need for including third-party libraries, resulting in less overhead and smaller bundle sizes.
   - **Cons**:
     - **Verbosity**: The implementation using `Set` might require more verbose code compared to the more concise Lodash approach. This could make it harder to read for those unfamiliar with native JavaScript methods.
     - **Browser Compatibility**: While modern JavaScript environments support `Set`, older browsers may not, which could limit usability.

### Other Considerations

- **Performance Results**: The benchmark results show that both implementations achieved nearly equivalent performance, with the `Set` approach slightly outperforming Lodash in terms of executions per second (approximately 1.95 million vs. 1.92 million).
- **Library Usage**: Lodash is a utility library designed to simplify JavaScript programming by providing common tasks such as array manipulation, deep cloning, and functional programming methods. The choice to use Lodash can depend on project requirements, code consistency, and the frequency of complex data manipulations.

### Alternatives

- **Native Array Methods**: The problem could be approached using native JavaScript methods like `filter`, `map`, or `reduce` without the need for Sets or Lodash. However, performance might be suboptimal if not carefully implemented.
- **Other Libraries**: Other libraries, such as Ramda or Underscore, could also be used for similar functionalities. Ramda, in particular, emphasizes functional programming principles.
- **Custom Implementations**: Another alternative could be writing custom functions to handle differences between arrays, possibly tailored for specific scenarios, potentially leading to better performance in particular cases but requiring more time for development and testing.

This benchmark highlights the trade-offs between simplicity, performance, and library usage, which are essential considerations for software engineers when deciding how to implement such features in their applications.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash difference vs Set (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Set

Created: one month ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Set

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one month ago):