@thebarefootdev Yes, but I wanted to keep it simple and that was the metic used in the benchmarks on the article. Also specs of my system won't matter since I am running both on the same machine. If you do a more comprehensive comparisons, do let me know. P.S: Please leave a like if you like the content :p

@thebarefootdev I have also made a video of the whole process, you can check it out here. https://www.dropbox.com/s/0z7m740wxii4p98/Comment%20Algorithm%20Experiment.mov?dl=0

@thebarefootdev const data = require ( './generated.json' ); // 7000 plus rows in the test data. function algorithmSuggestedInComments ( arr ) { return [... new Set (arr.map( JSON .stringify))].map( JSON .parse); } function removeDuplicates ( arr ) { const result = []; const lookedAtNodes = new Set (); // prepass const modifiedArr = arr.map( JSON .stringify); modifiedArr.forEach( ( elem, idx ) => { if (!lookedAtNodes.has(elem)) { result.push(arr[idx]); lookedAtNodes.add(elem); } }); return result; } console .time( "Algorithm suggested in Comments" ); algorithmSuggestedInComments(data); console .timeEnd( "Algorithm suggested in Comments" ); console .time( "Algorithm mentioned in the article" ); removeDuplicates(data); console .timeEnd( "Algorithm mentioned in the article" ); > node ./algo.js Algorithm suggested in Comments: 111. 192ms Algorithm mentioned in the article: 54. 276ms

Because doing JSON.parse will be expensive in comparison to the current implementation. Imagine very large JSON Objects, parse is far more expensive than a loop. I will try to run both the implementations on the big dataset and share the results here.