Benchmark: Filter unique, Set vs filter()

Script Preparation code:

function filterUniq(arr){
	return arr.filter((i,p)=>{
      return arr.indexOf(i) == p
    }); 
}
function setUniq(arr){
	return [...new Set(arr)] 
}
var a = [1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5]

Tests:

Filter
var b = filterUniq(a)
Set
var b = setUniq(a)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Filter
Set

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what is tested, the options compared, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JavaScript function that creates an array `a` with duplicate elements, and then defines two functions: `filterUniq()` and `setUniq()`. The purpose of these functions is to remove duplicates from the array. `filterUniq()` uses the `indexOf()` method to check if an element is already present in the array, while `setUniq()` uses the `Set` object to store unique elements.

**Options Compared**

The two options compared are:

1. **Filtering using `indexOf()`**: This approach uses the `indexOf()` method to check if an element is already present in the array.
2. **Using a `Set` object**: This approach uses the `Set` object to store unique elements, which automatically removes duplicates.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Filtering using `indexOf()`**:
	* Pros:
		+ Simple and easy to understand
		+ Works well for small arrays
	* Cons:
		+ Has a time complexity of O(n), making it slower for large arrays
		+ Can lead to performance issues if the array is very large
2. **Using a `Set` object**:
	* Pros:
		+ Faster than filtering using `indexOf()` (O(1) time complexity)
		+ More efficient for large arrays
	* Cons:
		+ May not be as intuitive or easy to understand, especially for those new to JavaScript
		+ Requires the use of a library or built-in function that may not be available in older browsers

**Other Considerations**

* **Library usage**: The benchmark uses the `Set` object, which is a built-in JavaScript object. However, if you wanted to test a custom implementation using a library like Lodash or Ramda, it would add an extra layer of complexity.
* **Special JS feature/syntax**: There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

If you wanted to compare other approaches for removing duplicates from an array, some alternatives could include:

1. Using the `Map` object (O(1) time complexity)
2. Implementing a custom solution using recursion or iteration
3. Using a library like Lodash's `uniq()` function

Keep in mind that each approach has its own trade-offs and considerations, and the best choice depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/72.0.3626.121 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 72 on Mac OS X 10.14.3

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Filter	2225610.5 Ops/sec
Set	1348186.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Filter unique, Set vs filter() (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Filter vs Set

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Filter

Set

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):