Benchmark: Some (array) vs Has (Map)

Script Preparation code:

var a = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
var b = new Map([[1,1],[2,1],[3,1],[4,1],[5,1],[6,1],[7,1],[8,1],[9,1],[10,1]])

Tests:

Some (array)
a.some(x => x == 10)
Has (Map)
b.has(10)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Some (array)
Has (Map)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/97.0.4692.71 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 97 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Some (array)	13125953.0 Ops/sec
Has (Map)	13601108.0 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 is being tested.

**Benchmark Test**

The benchmark test is comparing two approaches:

1. **Array.prototype.some()**: This method returns true if at least one element in the array passes the test implemented by the provided function. In this case, the test is `x => x == 10`, which checks if any element in the array matches the value 10.
2. **Map.prototype.has()**: This method returns true if a key exists in the map with the specified value.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches:

* Array.prototype.some()
* Map.prototype.has()

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

1. **Array.prototype.some()**:
	* Pros: Efficient for arrays, uses less memory than maps.
	* Cons: Not suitable for large datasets or datasets with sparse data (i.e., missing values).
2. **Map.prototype.has()**:
	* Pros: Suitable for large datasets and datasets with sparse data, as it only checks existence without iterating over all keys.
	* Cons: More memory-intensive than arrays.

In general, if you need to check for a specific value in an array or a map, `Array.prototype.some()` and `Map.prototype.has()`, respectively, are good choices. However, for very large datasets, `Map.prototype.has()` might be more efficient due to its sparse data handling capabilities.

**Library Used**

There is no library explicitly mentioned in the provided JSON. The code uses native JavaScript methods `Array.prototype.some()` and `Map.prototype.has()` without any external libraries or frameworks.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The test doesn't utilize any special JavaScript features or syntax, as it only involves basic array and map operations with a simple conditional function.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other alternatives for this benchmark could include:

* Using **filter()**: `a.filter(x => x == 10)` (similar to `Array.prototype.some()` but returns an array instead of a boolean value)
* Using **indexOf()**: `a.indexOf(10) != -1` (returns true if the element is found, false otherwise)
* Using a custom loop or for-each iteration

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as efficient as `Array.prototype.some()` or `Map.prototype.has()` for large datasets.

Related benchmarks:

Some (array) vs Has (Map) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Some (array) vs Has (Map)

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Some (array)

Has (Map)

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):