Benchmark: Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf vs. includes Separate Array

Script Preparation code:

var hasZero = [];
var withoutZero = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
    hasZero.push({
        id: Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000),
        data: 'hello'
    });
    withoutZero.push({
        id: Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000) + 1,
        data: 'hello'
    })
}

Tests:

Array.some
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v.id === 0) : withoutZero.some(v => v.id === 0);
Array.filter
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.filter(v => v.id === 0) : withoutZero.filter(v => v.id === 0);
Array.includes
var hasZeroIds = hasZero.map(hasNumber => hasNumber.id); var withoutZeroIds = withoutZero.map(hasNumber => hasNumber.id); var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZeroIds.includes(0) : withoutZeroIds.includes(0);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.some
Array.filter
Array.includes

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.150 Safari/537.36 Edg/88.0.705.63

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.some	66323.7 Ops/sec
Array.filter	17563.9 Ops/sec
Array.includes	2214.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing three different approaches to check if an array contains a specific value:

1. `Array.some()`: This method returns `true` as soon as it finds an element in the array that passes the test implemented by the provided function.
2. `Array.filter()`: This method creates a new array with all elements that pass the test implemented by the provided function.
3. `Array.includes()`**: This method returns `true` if an element with the specified value exists in the array, otherwise `false`.

**Options Compared**

The three options are compared:

* `Array.some()`: tests the first element of the array to find a match
* `Array.filter()`: creates a new array with only the elements that pass the test
* `Array.includes()`: checks if an element exists in the original array

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

1. `Array.some()`:
	* Pros: simple, efficient (only needs to check one element)
	* Cons: may not be as readable or intuitive for some developers
2. `Array.filter()`:
	* Pros: can create a new array with filtered elements, which might be useful in some cases
	* Cons: creates a new array, which can be memory-intensive and slower than just checking one element
3. `Array.includes()`:
	* Pros: simple and straightforward, easy to read and understand
	* Cons: may not be as efficient as `Array.some()` since it needs to search the entire array

**Library: None**

There are no external libraries used in this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax: None**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are being tested in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches that could have been included in the benchmark:

* Using `Array.prototype.findIndex()` to find the index of the first element that passes the test
* Using a custom loop or for-each method to iterate over the array

It's worth noting that the `Array.includes()` method is relatively new and might not be supported by older browsers.

Related benchmarks:

Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf vs. includes Separate Array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.some vs Array.filter vs Array.includes

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.some

Array.filter

Array.includes

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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