Benchmark: Test find x 2 vs flatMap + find

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [{
    "distributionId": 4,
    "numberOfTickets": 10,
    "teams": [
        {
            "teamId": 1,
            "teamName": "All Teams",
            "teamTypeId": 5
        },
        {
            "teamId": 8,
            "teamName": "Alabama",
            "teamTypeId": 1
        },
        {
            "teamId": 12,
            "teamName": "California",
            "teamTypeId": 1
        }
    ]
}];

Tests:

find().find()
arr.find( (ticket) => ticket.teams.find( (team) => team.teamName === 'All Teams' ) )
flatMap().find()
arr.flatMap((ticket) => ticket) .find((ticket) => ticket.teams.some( (team) => team.teamName === 'All Teams' ) );

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
find().find()
flatMap().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.

I'll break down the benchmark definition and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON defines two individual test cases for measuring JavaScript performance:

1. `arr.find((ticket) => ticket.teams.find((team) => team.teamName === 'All Teams'))`
2. `arr.flatMap((ticket) => ticket).find((ticket) => ticket.teams.some(team => team.teamName === 'All Teams'))`

**Options Compared**

These two test cases compare the performance of two different methods to achieve the same result:

1. Using `Array.prototype.find()` with a callback function that itself uses `Array.prototype.find()` inside.
2. Using `Array.prototype.flatMap()` and then applying `Array.prototype.find()` on the resulting flat array.

**Pros and Cons**

### Method 1: Nested `find()`

* **Pros**:
	+ Simple to understand and implement.
	+ Does not require knowledge of advanced Array methods like `flatMap()`.
* **Cons**:
	+ May lead to unnecessary iterations, especially if the inner `find()` returns null or undefined.
	+ Requires two function calls to achieve the desired result.

### Method 2: Using `flatMap()` followed by `find()`

* **Pros**:
	+ Reduces the number of unnecessary iterations compared to the nested `find()` approach.
	+ Can be more efficient, especially if the resulting flat array is smaller than the original array.
* **Cons**:
	+ Requires knowledge of `Array.prototype.flatMap()` and its behavior.
	+ May be less intuitive for developers who are not familiar with this method.

**Library/Utility Used**

In both test cases, no external libraries or utilities are explicitly mentioned. However, it's worth noting that the use of `find()`, `flatMap()`, and other Array methods relies on the browser's or environment's implementation of these functions, which may be part of the ECMAScript standard.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The benchmark definition uses a few special JavaScript features:

* Template literals (e.g., `(ticket) => ticket.teams.find(...)`)
* Arrow functions (e.g., `arr.flatMap((ticket) => ticket)`)

These features are widely supported in modern browsers and environments, but may not be compatible with older versions or specific configurations.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other alternatives to achieve the same result could include:

1. Using a custom loop to iterate over the array elements.
2. Utilizing other Array methods, such as `some()` or `every()`, instead of `find()` and `flatMap()`.
3. Employing more advanced techniques, like parallel processing or caching, to optimize performance.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as concise or efficient as the original implementation using `find()` and `flatMap()`.

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/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
find().find()	16996370.0 Ops/sec
flatMap().find()	3351838.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Test find x 2 vs flatMap + find (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: find().find() vs flatMap().find()

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

find().find()

flatMap().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):