Benchmark: Find vs Math - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

window.mileage = [
            {
              name: '1000 mileage',
              mileage: '1000',
              description: 'mileage-description',
            },
            {
              name: '2000 mileage',
              mileage: '2000',
              description: 'mileage-description 2',
            },
            {
              name: '3000 mileage',
              mileage: '3000',
              description: 'mileage-description 3',
            }
          ];

function generateRandomInput() { // Just some test thing to make sure the specific index isn't a factor as to which is faster
	return Math.floor(Math.random() * 3000)
}

Tests:

Array.find()
mileage.find(obj => parseInt(obj.mileage, 10) >= generateRandomInput())
Math
const index = Math.floor(generateRandomInput()/1000); mileage[index];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.find()
Math

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview**

The provided benchmark, "Find vs Math", compares the performance of two approaches for finding an element in an array: using the `Array.prototype.find()` method and converting the desired index into an actual value.

**Benchmark Definition JSON Analysis**

The benchmark definition defines a JavaScript function that generates random input data using `Math.floor(Math.random() * 3000)`. This function is used to create a test dataset, "mileage", containing objects with a unique "mileage" property. The "mileage" property values are integers between 1000 and 3000.

The benchmark definition consists of two parts:

1. `Array.find()` method:
```javascript
mileage.find(obj => parseInt(obj.mileage, 10) >= generateRandomInput())
```
This code uses the `find()` method to search for an object in the "mileage" array where the value of the "mileage" property is greater than or equal to a randomly generated number.

2. Converting desired index into an actual value:
```javascript
const index = Math.floor(generateRandomInput()/1000);
mileage[index];
```
This code generates a random index by dividing the random input by 1000 and then uses that index to access the corresponding element in the "mileage" array.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

* Using `Array.prototype.find()`: This method returns an iterator object, which contains a function value as its next property. If no elements satisfy the condition, it returns `undefined`.
* Converting desired index into an actual value: This approach uses the generated index to access the corresponding element in the array.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Array.prototype.find()**

Pros:

* Less error-prone than manually converting indices
* Can handle cases where no elements satisfy the condition

Cons:

* May be slower due to the overhead of creating an iterator object

Converting desired index into an actual value:

Pros:

* Faster, as it directly accesses the element without creating an iterator object
* More memory-efficient, as it doesn't require additional memory for the iterator object

Cons:

* Error-prone if the generated index is invalid or out of bounds
* May not work correctly if no elements satisfy the condition (returns `undefined`)

**Other Considerations**

When using `Array.prototype.find()`, it's essential to note that this method returns an iterator object, which may be more efficient than directly accessing an element. However, if the array is small, this overhead might be negligible.

When converting desired index into an actual value, ensure that the generated index is within the bounds of the array and accurately represents the expected position in the data structure.

**Library Used**

No specific library is mentioned in the benchmark definition. The `Array.prototype.find()` method is a built-in JavaScript function.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark uses JavaScript's "arrow function" syntax (e.g., `obj => parseInt(obj.mileage, 10) >= generateRandomInput()`) and also includes a modern JavaScript feature, the spread operator (`\r\n            {\r\n              name: '3000 mileage',\r\n              mileage: '3000',\r\n              description: 'mileage-description 3',\r\n            }\r\n`).

**Alternatives**

Other approaches to finding an element in an array include:

* Using `Array.prototype.findIndex()` (returns the index of the first element that satisfies the condition, or -1 if no elements match)
* Implementing a custom binary search algorithm for large datasets
* Using libraries like Lodash or Ramda, which provide optimized functions for common data manipulation tasks.

In conclusion, the "Find vs Math" benchmark provides a simple yet informative comparison of two approaches to finding an element in an array. By understanding the pros and cons of each approach, developers can make informed decisions about which method to use depending on their specific requirements and performance constraints.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/66.0.3359.139 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 66 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.find()	779439.1 Ops/sec
Math	1329490.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Find vs Math (version: 5)

Using Array.find vs converting desired input into an index.

Comparing performance of: Array.find() vs Math

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Array.find()

Math

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):