Benchmark: Some vs. Filter vs. findIndex vs find

Script Preparation code:

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

Tests:

Array.some
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.some(v => v === 0);
Array.filter
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.filter(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.filter(v => v === 0);
Array.findIndex
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.findIndex(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.findIndex(v => v === 0);
Array.find
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.find(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.find(v => v === 0);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.some
Array.filter
Array.findIndex
Array.find

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case created using MeasureThat.net, which compares the performance of different approaches for filtering and searching arrays in JavaScript.

**Benchmark Definition**

The script preparation code generates two arrays: `hasZero` and `withoutZero`. The former contains 10,000 random numbers between 0 and 1000, while the latter contains 10,000 random numbers between 1 and 1000. This creates an interesting scenario where there's a possibility of finding at least one zero in both arrays.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark tests four different approaches:

1. `Array.some()`: Returns `true` if at least one element of the array satisfies the provided condition.
2. `Array.filter()`: Creates a new array with all elements that pass the test implemented by the provided function.
3. `Array.findIndex()`: Returns the index of the first element in the array that satisfies the provided condition, or -1 if no elements satisfy it.
4. `Array.find()`: Returns the value of the first element in the array that satisfies the provided condition, or `undefined` if no elements satisfy it.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Array.some()**:
	* Pros: Simple to implement, efficient for large arrays with many zeros.
	* Cons: May perform poorly on large arrays without zeros due to unnecessary iterations.
2. **Array.filter()**:
	* Pros: Can be used as a building block for more complex filtering tasks.
	* Cons: Creates a new array, which can lead to memory issues for very large datasets.
3. **Array.findIndex()**:
	* Pros: Returns the index of the first zero, making it useful for finding specific elements in an array.
	* Cons: May be slower than `some()` due to the need to find the exact index.
4. **Array.find()**:
	* Pros: Returns the actual value of the first zero, making it easy to use in subsequent operations.
	* Cons: Similar to `findIndex()`, may be slower due to the need to return a value.

**Library and Purpose**

The `Math.random()` function is used to generate random numbers for creating the benchmark arrays. The `Math.floor()` function is also used to round down the results of `Math.random()`.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None mentioned explicitly, but the use of template literals (`"var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.some(v => v === 0);"`) is a modern JavaScript feature. The `!!` operator is used to convert the result of `Math.round()` to a boolean value, which is then used as the condition for the `some()` method.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need more efficient filtering or searching algorithms, consider using:

* `Array.prototype.every()`: Returns `true` if all elements in the array pass the test implemented by the provided function.
* `Array.prototype.forEach()`: Iterates over the array without creating a new one.
* `Native Web Workers` for parallel processing and optimized execution.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different trade-offs in terms of complexity, memory usage, or performance.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/104.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 104 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.some	236495.0 Ops/sec
Array.filter	44463.7 Ops/sec
Array.findIndex	151233.6 Ops/sec
Array.find	202776.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Some vs. Filter vs. findIndex vs find (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.some vs Array.filter vs Array.findIndex vs Array.find

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.some

Array.filter

Array.findIndex

Array.find

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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