Benchmark: for loop vs array find

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var a = 1
var b = [0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1]

Tests:

For loop
var c for(i=0; i < b.length; i++){ if(b[i] === a) { c = b[i]; break; } }
Array loop
var c function test(value) { return value === a } c = b.find(test) console.log('c: ', c)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
For loop
Array loop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark test case.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing the performance of two different approaches to find an element in an array:

1. Using a `for` loop
2. Using the `find()` method provided by the Lodash library (which is imported via `script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'`)

**Individual Test Cases**

The two test cases are:

1. **For Loop**: This test case uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate through the array and find the element `a`. The loop breaks when it finds the first occurrence of `a`.
2. **Array Loop (using Lodash)**: This test case uses the `find()` method from the Lodash library to find the element `a` in the array.

**Latest Benchmark Result**

The benchmark result shows that:

* Using a `for` loop takes approximately 6146 executions per second.
* Using the `find()` method takes approximately 15984 executions per second, which is about 2.6 times faster than the `for` loop approach.

**What's Being Tested?**

In this test case, we're measuring the performance of two different approaches to find an element in an array:

1. **For Loop**: This approach iterates through the entire array using a traditional `for` loop, which can be slow for large arrays.
2. **Array Find (using Lodash)**: This approach uses the `find()` method from the Lodash library, which provides a more efficient way to find an element in an array.

**Pros and Cons**

* **For Loop**: Pros: simple, easy to implement; Cons: can be slow for large arrays.
* **Array Find (using Lodash)**: Pros: faster than `for` loop, especially for large arrays; Cons: requires the Lodash library, which adds overhead.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors:

1. **Performance**: If performance is critical, use the `find()` method.
2. **Array size**: If the array is small (e.g., fewer than 100 elements), a `for` loop might be sufficient.
3. **Additional overhead**: Remember that using the Lodash library adds some overhead, which may not be significant for small arrays but could matter for very large ones.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to consider when searching an array include:

1. **Filter() method**: Similar to `find()` but returns all elements matching the condition.
2. **Some() method**: Returns `true` if at least one element matches the condition.
3. **Every() method**: Returns `true` if all elements match the condition.

These methods can also be used with or without a library, and their performance might vary depending on the specific use case.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_13_6) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/11.1.2 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 11 on Mac OS X 10.13.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
For loop	6146.5 Ops/sec
Array loop	15984.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for loop vs array find (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: For loop vs Array loop

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

For loop

Array loop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated 25 days ago):