Benchmark: for...of (no break) vs find()

HTML Preparation code:

<div id='test'></div>

Tests:

for..of
var arr = ['hello', 'a', 'b']; let val; for (var value of arr) { if (value === 'b') { val = value; } }
Array.find()
var arr = ['hello', 'a', 'b']; let val = arr.find(node => node.id === 'b');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for..of
Array.find()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for..of	146496000.0 Ops/sec
Array.find()	160948016.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 7 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark provided tests the performance of two different approaches to iterating through an array in JavaScript: the `for...of` loop and the `Array.find()` method. These two methods differ in execution style and their intended use cases.

### Test Cases Explained

1. **for...of Loop**
   - **Code**: 
     ```javascript
     var arr = ['hello', 'a', 'b'];
     let val;
     for (var value of arr) {
       if (value === 'b') {
         val = value;
       }
     }
     ```
   - **Test Name**: `for..of`
   - **Description**: The `for...of` loop is designed to iterate over iterable objects, such as arrays. In this case, it checks each element in the array to see if it equals 'b'. If a match is found, it assigns that value to the variable `val`.
   - **Pros**: 
     - Simplicity and readability: The `for...of` syntax is clear and easy to understand.
     - Works with any iterable, not just arrays.
   - **Cons**: 
     - It may not be as performant as other iteration methods, especially for larger arrays, since it has to explicitly check each value.
     - It lacks short-circuiting behavior; it will traverse the entire array even after finding a match.

2. **Array.find() Method**
   - **Code**: 
     ```javascript
     var arr = ['hello', 'a', 'b'];
     let val = arr.find(node => node === 'b');
     ```
   - **Test Name**: `Array.find()`
   - **Description**: The `Array.find()` method returns the first element in the array that satisfies the provided testing function. In this case, it searches for the first element that equals 'b'.
   - **Pros**:
     - Performance: It can be more efficient than `for...of` since it stops searching after finding the first match, making it potentially faster in cases where a match occurs before the end of the array.
     - Functional programming style: It promotes a more functional approach to programming where functions are treated as first-class citizens.
   - **Cons**:
     - Readability can vary depending on the familiarity of the developer with functional programming concepts.
     - Slightly less flexible than `for...of` since it only operates on arrays.

### Benchmark Results

The benchmark results show the performance of each method in terms of executions per second:
- `Array.find()`: **160,948,016.0** executions per second
- `for..of`: **146,496,000.0** executions per second

From these results, it is evident that `Array.find()` outperforms the `for...of` loop in this specific case. This could be attributed to its short-circuiting behavior, which reduces unnecessary iterations once the desired element is found.

### Alternatives

Several other alternatives can be considered when iterating or searching through arrays:

- **Traditional For Loop**:
  ```javascript
  for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
    if (arr[i] === 'b') {
      // do something
    }
  }
  ```
  - Pros: Very performant and flexible.
  - Cons: More verbose and less readable compared to the other options.

- **Array.filter()**:
  - Returns an array of all elements that match a certain condition.
  ```javascript
  let found = arr.filter(node => node === 'b');
  ```
  - Pros: Can be used to retrieve multiple matches.
  - Cons: If only one match is needed, this is less efficient since it processes all elements.

- **Array.some()**:
  - Tests whether at least one element in the array passes the condition.
  ```javascript
  let exists = arr.some(node => node === 'b');
  ```
  - Pros: Efficient for checking existence without returning the element.
  - Cons: Does not retrieve the actual element.

### Conclusion

In summary, this benchmark illustrates the comparative performance of the `for...of` loop and the `Array.find()` method. While both approaches are suitable for looping through arrays, `Array.find()` demonstrates superior performance in scenarios where a match is identified early in the search process. Depending on the use case, developers may choose between these options or explore traditional loops and other array methods based on performance and readability considerations.

Related benchmarks:

for...of (no break) vs find() (version: 1)

Testing the difference between native loops and find()

Comparing performance of: for..of vs Array.find()

Created: 7 days ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for..of

Array.find()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 7 days ago):