Benchmark: array find test 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.core.js"></script>

Tests:

array find
var a = [...Array(100000)].map((_, index) => `element${index + 1}`); var b = a.find(item => item === 'element2000');
array some
var a = [...Array(100000)].map((_, index) => `element${index + 1}`); var b = a.find(item => item === 'element111800');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array find
array some

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 on MeasureThat.net.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark compares two approaches to find an element in an array: the new ES6 spread operator (`...`) and the traditional `concat()` method. The test cases are designed to measure the performance difference between these two methods for finding specific elements in large arrays.

**Options compared:**

1. **ES6 Spread Operator (`...`)**: This is a new way of creating arrays using the `...` spread operator. It's used to create a new array by copying elements from an existing array.
2. **Traditional Concatenation (`concat()` method)**: This is the traditional way of concatenating arrays in JavaScript.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **ES6 Spread Operator (`...`)**:
	+ Pros: More concise and readable code, performance comparable to native array methods.
	+ Cons: May not be supported in older browsers or environments that don't support ES6 features.
* **Traditional Concatenation (`concat()` method)**:
	+ Pros: Wide browser support, easy to implement.
	+ Cons: Less readable code, may lead to performance issues with large arrays.

**Library used:**

The benchmark uses the `lodash` library, specifically `_.find()`, which is a utility function for finding an element in an array. Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a lot of useful functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

None mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other considerations:**

* The benchmark uses a large array size (`100000`) to simulate real-world scenarios.
* The test cases use the `find()` method with a callback function to find an element in the array. This is a common pattern for finding elements in arrays.
* The benchmark measures the executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond) for each test case, which indicates the number of times the code executes within a second.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives to the ES6 spread operator and traditional concatenation methods include:

* Using `Array.prototype.findIndex()` method to find an element in an array.
* Implementing custom binary search algorithms for finding elements in sorted arrays.
* Using libraries like Lodash or other utility functions for array manipulation.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics, readability, and use cases compared to the methods tested in this benchmark.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 months 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
array find	202.8 Ops/sec
array some	197.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

array find test 2 (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: array find vs array some

Created: 10 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array find

array some

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):