如果您的环境支持ECMAScript 6 Set，一个简单而有效的方法(参见规范链接):

function intersect(a, b) {
  var setA = new Set(a);
  var setB = new Set(b);
  var intersection = new Set([...setA].filter(x => setB.has(x)));
  return Array.from(intersection);
}

更短，但可读性更差(也没有创建额外的交集集):

function intersect(a, b) {
  var setB = new Set(b);
  return [...new Set(a)].filter(x => setB.has(x));
}

注意，当使用Set时，你只会得到不同的值，因此new Set([1,2,3,3])。Size的值为3。

//在线性时间内返回数组a中也在b中的元素: 函数相交(a, b) { 返回a.filter (Set.prototype。new Set(b)); ｝ / /例如: console.log(相交([1,2,3],[2、3、4、5]));

我推荐上述简洁的解决方案，它在大输入上优于其他实现。如果在小输入上的性能很重要，请检查下面的替代方案。

备选方案和性能比较:

有关替代实现，请参阅下面的代码片段，并检查https://jsperf.com/array-intersection-comparison以进行性能比较。

function intersect_for(a, b) { const result = []; const alen = a.length; const blen = b.length; for (let i = 0; i < alen; ++i) { const ai = a[i]; for (let j = 0; j < blen; ++j) { if (ai === b[j]) { result.push(ai); break; } } } return result; } function intersect_filter_indexOf(a, b) { return a.filter(el => b.indexOf(el) !== -1); } function intersect_filter_in(a, b) { const map = b.reduce((map, el) => {map[el] = true; return map}, {}); return a.filter(el => el in map); } function intersect_for_in(a, b) { const result = []; const map = {}; for (let i = 0, length = b.length; i < length; ++i) { map[b[i]] = true; } for (let i = 0, length = a.length; i < length; ++i) { if (a[i] in map) result.push(a[i]); } return result; } function intersect_filter_includes(a, b) { return a.filter(el => b.includes(el)); } function intersect_filter_has_this(a, b) { return a.filter(Set.prototype.has, new Set(b)); } function intersect_filter_has_arrow(a, b) { const set = new Set(b); return a.filter(el => set.has(el)); } function intersect_for_has(a, b) { const result = []; const set = new Set(b); for (let i = 0, length = a.length; i < length; ++i) { if (set.has(a[i])) result.push(a[i]); } return result; }

Firefox 53的结果:

Ops/sec on large arrays (10,000 elements): filter + has (this) 523 (this answer) for + has 482 for-loop + in 279 filter + in 242 for-loops 24 filter + includes 14 filter + indexOf 10 Ops/sec on small arrays (100 elements): for-loop + in 384,426 filter + in 192,066 for-loops 159,137 filter + includes 104,068 filter + indexOf 71,598 filter + has (this) 43,531 (this answer) filter + has (arrow function) 35,588

function intersectionOfArrays(arr1, arr2) {
    return arr1.filter((element) => arr2.indexOf(element) !== -1).filter((element, pos, self) => self.indexOf(element) == pos);
}

使用Underscore.js或lodash.js

_.intersection( [0,345,324] , [1,0,324] )  // gives [0,324]

我会用对我来说最有效的方法来贡献:

if (!Array.prototype.intersect){
Array.prototype.intersect = function (arr1) {

    var r = [], o = {}, l = this.length, i, v;
    for (i = 0; i < l; i++) {
        o[this[i]] = true;
    }
    l = arr1.length;
    for (i = 0; i < l; i++) {
        v = arr1[i];
        if (v in o) {
            r.push(v);
        }
    }
    return r;
};
}

我认为在内部使用一个对象可以帮助计算，也可以提高性能。

//方法维护每个元素的计数，也适用于负元素

function intersect(a,b){
    
    const A = {};
    a.forEach((v)=>{A[v] ? ++A[v] : A[v] = 1});
    const B = {};
    b.forEach((v)=>{B[v] ? ++B[v] : B[v] = 1});
    const C = {};
    Object.entries(A).map((x)=>C[x[0]] = Math.min(x[1],B[x[0]]))
    return Object.entries(C).map((x)=>Array(x[1]).fill(Number(x[0]))).flat();
}
const x = [1,1,-1,-1,0,0,2,2];
const y = [2,0,1,1,1,1,0,-1,-1,-1];
const result = intersect(x,y);
console.log(result);  // (7) [0, 0, 1, 1, 2, -1, -1]