Benchmark: ramda union vs lodash unionWith vs Set for merging without duplicates

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.15/lodash.min.js'></script>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.26.1/ramda.min.js'></script>

Tests:

Set
const first = [ {a: 3, b: 3, c: "hey"}, {a: 3, b: 2, c: "hey"}, {a: 1, b: 2, c: "bye"}, {a: 3, b: 4, c: "hey"}, {a: 2, b: 1, c: "bye"} ]; const second = [ {a: 3, b: 4, c: "hey"}, {a: 2, b: 1, c: "bye"}, {a: 4, b: 4, c: "sup"}, {a: 3, b: 3, c: "hey"} ]; return [...new Set([...first, ...second])]
_.unionWith
const first = [ {a: 3, b: 3, c: "hey"}, {a: 3, b: 2, c: "hey"}, {a: 1, b: 2, c: "bye"}, {a: 3, b: 4, c: "hey"}, {a: 2, b: 1, c: "bye"} ]; const second = [ {a: 3, b: 4, c: "hey"}, {a: 2, b: 1, c: "bye"}, {a: 4, b: 4, c: "sup"}, {a: 3, b: 3, c: "hey"} ]; return _.unionWith(first, second, _.isEqual);
R.unionWith
const first = [ {a: 3, b: 3, c: "hey"}, {a: 3, b: 2, c: "hey"}, {a: 1, b: 2, c: "bye"}, {a: 3, b: 4, c: "hey"}, {a: 2, b: 1, c: "bye"} ]; const second = [ {a: 3, b: 4, c: "hey"}, {a: 2, b: 1, c: "bye"}, {a: 4, b: 4, c: "sup"}, {a: 3, b: 3, c: "hey"} ]; return R.unionWith(R.equals, first, second);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Set
_.unionWith
R.unionWith

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different approaches for merging two arrays while removing duplicates:

1. `Set`: Using the built-in `Set` data structure to merge the arrays and remove duplicates.
2. `_unionWith` (Lodash): Using the `unionWith` function from Lodash, which takes a compare function as an argument, to merge the arrays and remove duplicates.
3. `R.unionWith` (Ramda): Using the `unionWith` function from Ramda, which is similar to Lodash's version but implemented differently.

**Options compared:**

The three options are compared in terms of their execution speed, measured in executions per second.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Set**: This approach uses a built-in data structure that is optimized for fast lookups and removal of duplicates. It is likely to be the fastest option.
	+ Pros: Fast, efficient use of built-in data structure.
	+ Cons: May require additional memory allocation, depending on the size of the input arrays.
* **_.unionWith` (Lodash): This approach uses a compare function to determine whether an element should be included in the resulting array. It can handle cases where the elements have different types or structures.
	+ Pros: Flexible, can handle various data structures and types.
	+ Cons: May have slower performance due to the comparison function overhead.
* `R.unionWith` (Ramda): Similar to Lodash's version, but implemented differently. May have similar pros and cons.

**Library usage:**

* Lodash is used in the `_unionWith` test case. Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functional programming helpers.
* Ramda is used in the `R.unionWith` test case. Ramda is another popular functional programming library for JavaScript.

**Special JS features or syntax:**

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

**Other alternatives:**

There are other approaches to merging arrays while removing duplicates, such as:

* Using a custom implementation with loops and conditionals.
* Using other libraries like Immutable.js or Cycle.js.
* Using a different data structure, such as an array of objects with unique keys.

However, the built-in `Set` data structure and Lodash/Ramda's `unionWith` function are likely to be the most efficient and convenient options.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/125.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 125 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Set	1632898.8 Ops/sec
_.unionWith	65713.2 Ops/sec
R.unionWith	48339.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

ramda union vs lodash unionWith vs Set for merging without duplicates (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Set vs _.unionWith vs R.unionWith

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Set

_.unionWith

R.unionWith

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):