Benchmark: Array find vs includes (temp3214)

Script Preparation code:

var keys = [
  { number: "1", letters: "" },
  { number: "2", letters: "ABC" },
  { number: "3", letters: "DEF" },
  { number: "4", letters: "GHI" },
  { number: "5", letters: "JKL" },
  { number: "6", letters: "MNO" },
  { number: "7", letters: "PQRS" },
  { number: "8", letters: "TUV" },
  { number: "9", letters: "WXYZ" },
  { number: "*", letters: "" },
  { number: "0", letters: "+" },
  { number: "#", letters: "" },
];

var inputs = [
    "0",
    "1",
    "2",
    "3",
    "4",
    "5",
    "6",
    "7",
    "8",
    "9",
    "A",
    "B",
    "C",
    "D",
    "E",
    "F",
    "G",
    "H",
    "I",
    "J",
    "K",
    "L",
    "M",
    "N",
    "O",
    "P",
    "Q",
    "R",
    "S",
    "T",
    "U",
    "V",
    "W",
    "X",
    "Y",
    "Z",
    "*",
    "#"
]

Tests:

Find
var tempResult = inputs.map(input=>keys.find(key=>key.number===input))
Includes
var tempResult = inputs.map(input=>keys.map(key=>key.number).includes(input))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Find
Includes

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 YaBrowser/24.12.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Yandex Browser 24 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Find	2580886.2 Ops/sec
Includes	739356.9 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 5 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the details of this JavaScript benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The `Array find vs includes (temp3214)` benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to achieve a similar result: finding an element in an array using either `find()` or `includes()`. The test is designed to measure which approach is faster, with more executions per second.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **`keys.find(key => key.number === input)`**: This approach uses the `find()` method to search for an element in the `keys` array that matches a given condition (`key.number === input`). The `find()` method returns the first element from the array that satisfies the provided callback function.
2. **`keys.map(key => key.number).includes(input)`**: This approach maps each element of the `keys` array to its `number` property and then uses the `includes()` method to search for a given value (`input`) in the resulting array.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **`find()`**:
	* Pros: More concise and readable, as it directly searches for an element without mapping.
	* Cons: May be slower if the array is very large, since `find()` only returns the first matching element, while `includes()` can search through the entire array.
2. **`includes()`**:
	* Pros: Can search through the entire array, making it potentially faster for large datasets.
	* Cons: Requires more code and may be less readable due to the additional step of mapping.

**Library Used**

None in this benchmark. Both `find()` and `includes()` are built-in JavaScript methods that do not rely on external libraries.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

This benchmark does not explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax, such as async/await, promises, or modern ES6+ features like arrow functions. The code is written in a concise and readable style using standard JavaScript constructs.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to write this benchmark from scratch, alternative approaches could include:

1. **Using `forEach()`**: Instead of `find()` or `includes()`, you could use the `forEach()` method to iterate over the array and check for matches.
2. **Using a loop**: A simple loop can be used to compare each element in the array with the input value, similar to how the `includes()` approach works.

Here's an example of how the benchmark could be implemented using a loop:
```javascript
for (let i = 0; i < keys.length; i++) {
  if (keys[i].number === input) {
    // Perform some action when match is found
  }
}
```
Keep in mind that this approach would likely be slower than using `find()` or `includes()`, since it involves more iterations over the array.

In summary, this benchmark provides a simple and concise way to compare the performance of two approaches for searching an element in an array: using `find()` versus using `includes()`.

Related benchmarks:

Array find vs includes (temp3214) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Find vs Includes

Created: 10 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Find

Includes

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 5 months ago):