Benchmark: Some vs Find vs. keys and values

Script Preparation code:


var data = {}

for (let i = 0; i < 5000; ++i) {
  data['key' + i] = ['toto']
}

Tests:

Some
const hasResultArrays = Object.values(data).some(e => e.username === 'titi')
key iterator
let hasResultArrays = false; for (const key in data) { if (Array.isArray(data[key])) { hasResultArrays = true; break; } }
values iterator
let hasResultArrays = false; for (const value of Object.values(data)) { if (Array.isArray(value)) { hasResultArrays = true; break; } }
find
const hasResultArrays = Object.values(data).find(e => e.username === 'titi')
classical
let hasResultArrays = false; const keys = Object.keys(data) for (let i = 0, il = keys.length; i < il; ++i) { if (Array.isArray(data[keys[i]])) { hasResultArrays = true; break; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Some
key iterator
values iterator
find
classical

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 break down what's being tested in this benchmark.

The test case is designed to measure the performance of different approaches for checking if an array exists within an object's values. The object `data` has 5000 properties, each with a value that is either an array or not an array.

Here are the four main approaches being compared:

1. **Some**: This approach uses the `some()` method, which returns `true` as soon as it finds at least one element in the iterable (in this case, `Object.values(data)`) that passes the test implemented by its provided function (`e => e.username === 'titi'`). If no elements pass the test, it returns `false`.
	* Pros: Efficient and concise way to check if any of the values match a condition.
	* Cons: May short-circuit too early, potentially affecting performance in cases where only one value needs to be checked.
2. **Find**: This approach uses the `find()` method, which returns the first element in the iterable (in this case, `Object.values(data)`) that satisfies the test implemented by its provided function (`e => e.username === 'titi'`). If no elements satisfy the test, it returns `undefined`.
	* Pros: More readable and intuitive way to check for a specific value.
	* Cons: May be slower than `some()` because it needs to traverse the entire iterable before returning.
3. **Classical**: This approach uses a traditional loop to iterate over the keys of the object (`Object.keys(data)`) and then checks if each corresponding value is an array.
	* Pros: More explicit control over the iteration process, which can be beneficial for debugging purposes.
	* Cons: Less efficient than `some()` and `find()`, as it requires more manual iterations.
4. **Key iterator**: This approach uses a traditional loop to iterate over the keys of the object (`Object.keys(data)`) and then checks if each corresponding value is an array using the `in` operator (not explicitly shown in this code snippet, but implied).
	* Pros: Similar to the classical approach, providing explicit control over the iteration process.
	* Cons: Less efficient than `some()` and `find()`, as it requires more manual iterations.

All of these approaches are valid ways to check if an array exists within an object's values. The performance differences between them will depend on the specific use case and data distribution.

As for other considerations, you may also want to think about:

* Using `Array.prototype.some()` or `Array.prototype.find()` methods directly on the arrays in question, without iterating over the entire object.
* Optimizing the comparison function itself (e.g., using `===` instead of `==`) and considering caching or memoization for repeated computations.
* Considering alternative data structures or libraries that might provide more efficient or convenient solutions for this problem.

Regarding other alternatives, some potential options include:

* Using a library like Lodash to implement these methods, which can provide additional features and optimizations.
* Utilizing modern JavaScript features like `for...of` loops, which can simplify the iteration process.
* Considering a different data structure, such as an array of objects, where the comparison is more straightforward.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on the specific requirements of your use case.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:108.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/108.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 108 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Some	22284.7 Ops/sec
key iterator	67484496.0 Ops/sec
values iterator	42857.2 Ops/sec
find	23720.7 Ops/sec
classical	53256.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Some vs Find vs. keys and values (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Some vs key iterator vs values iterator vs find vs classical

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Some

key iterator

values iterator

find

classical

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):