Benchmark: Some vs. Filter vs. findIndex with object

Script Preparation code:

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

Tests:

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

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

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

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 the provided benchmark definition and test cases to understand what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark consists of three test cases that compare the performance of different methods for filtering or finding an index of elements in arrays with numbers:

1. `Array.some()`: tests if any element in the array meets a certain condition (in this case, `num === 0`).
2. `Array.filter()`: tests if all elements in the array meet a certain condition (in this case, `num === 0`).
3. `Array.findIndex()`: tests if an index of the array can be found where an element meets a certain condition (in this case, `num === 0`).

The benchmark creates two arrays: `hasZero` and `withoutZero`, each containing 10,000 elements with random numbers between 0 and 1000. The `hasZero` array has some elements with zeros, while the `withoutZero` array does not.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code initializes two empty arrays, `hasZero` and `withoutZero`, and populates them with the generated random numbers.

```javascript
var hasZero = [];
var withoutZero = [];

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

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of three test cases, each defining a different method to filter or find an index:

1. `Array.some()`: tests if any element in the array meets the condition `num === 0`.
```javascript
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v.num === 0) : withoutZero.some(v => v.num === 0);
```

2. `Array.filter()`: tests if all elements in the array meet the condition `num === 0`.
```javascript
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.filter(v => v.num === 0) : withoutZero.filter(v => v.num === 0);
```

3. `Array.findIndex()`: tests if an index of the array can be found where an element meets the condition `num === 0`.
```javascript
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.findIndex(v => v.num === 0) : withoutZero.findIndex(v => v.num === 0);
```

**Library**

None of the test cases use any external libraries.

**Special JavaScript Features/Syntax**

The benchmark uses some special features:

* `!!` operator: a double-not operator that converts a value to a boolean.
* `Math.round()` function: rounds a number to the nearest integer.
* Template literals (`v => v.num === 0`): an arrow function expression with a lambda-like syntax.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. `Array.some()`: Pros:
	* Simple to implement
	* Efficient for small arrays or when only one element needs to be checked
	Cons:
	* May iterate over the entire array even if only one element meets the condition
	* Can be slower than other methods for large arrays
2. `Array.filter()`: Pros:
	* More efficient than `some()` because it creates a new array with only the matching elements
	* Suitable for most cases where all elements need to meet the condition
Cons:
	* Creates a new array, which can consume more memory
	* May be slower than other methods if not used correctly (e.g., using `filter()` on a large array when only one element needs to be matched)
3. `Array.findIndex()`: Pros:
	* Efficient for finding the index of the first matching element
	* Suitable for cases where you need to return an index, but not necessarily all elements that match
Cons:
	* May be slower than other methods if used on large arrays or when only one element needs to be matched
	* Returns `-1` if no element matches

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to these methods:

* For filtering: `Array.map()` and `Array.reduce()`, which can also create new arrays with matching elements.
* For finding an index: other array methods like `Array.indexOf()` or using `for...in` loop, but `findIndex()` is generally more efficient.

Keep in mind that the choice of method depends on the specific use case and performance requirements.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/112.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 112 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.some	173143.2 Ops/sec
Array.filter	32510.4 Ops/sec
Array.findIndex	119969.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Some vs. Filter vs. findIndex with object (version: 0)

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

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.some

Array.filter

Array.findIndex

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):