Benchmark: 123081230213812300812

Script Preparation code:

var arr_userTags = ["freq/5", "lifetime_subscriptions/3+", "freq_beverages/0", "active_plans/1+", "active_beverages_plans/0", "freq_first/bronze", "freq_first_bucket/5", "current_freq_90d/13", "freq_first_5_8/freq<9", "freq_first_5-8/freq_5-8", "freq_first_5-8", "current_freq_90d/10+", "freq/5-8", "beverage/new", "aov_90d/40-45", "aov_lifetime/45-50", "has_voucher_coca", "coca_lover/>3", "clubber_lifecycle/active", "no_itau_purchases", "smart_cmp_coverage/middle", "smart_cmp_coverage_tier/middle", "drink_lover/>3", "guarana_lover/1", "user_had_vip", "months_with_club_subscriptions/4+", "used_mastercard_last_month", "is_vip", "months_with_club_orders/4", "ifood_beneficios", "completed_voucher_uses", "months_with_vip/1", "top_city/tier3_high", "smart_campaign/active", "club_profile/engajado", "cms/b"];
var arr_includeAll = ['drink_lover/>3', 'months_with_vip/1'];

function randomInt(min, max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min + 1) + min);
}

function sort(arr, property) {
  return [...arr].sort((a, b) => (a[property] > b[property]) ? 1 : ((a[property] === b[property]) ? 0 : -1));
}

var groups = [];
var maxGroups = 550;
var searchId = 210;

for (let i = 0; i < maxGroups; i += 1) {
	groups.push({
		id: i,
        priority: randomInt(2, 999),
        includeAll: ['drink_lover/>3', 'months_with_vip/1'],
        excludeAll: ['anything/0-5'],
        includeAny: [],
        excludeAny: [],
	});
}

var sortedGroups = sort(groups, 'priority');

Tests:

filter
const filteredGroups = groups.filter((group) => { group.includeAll.every(tag => arr_userTags.includes(tag)); group.excludeAll.every(tag => !arr_userTags.includes(tag)); group.includeAny.some(tag => arr_userTags.includes(tag)); group.excludeAny.some(tag => !arr_userTags.includes(tag)); return group.id === searchId; }); const [group] = sort(filteredGroups, 'priority');
find
const group = sortedGroups.find((group) => { group.includeAll.every(tag => arr_userTags.includes(tag)); group.excludeAll.every(tag => !arr_userTags.includes(tag)); group.includeAny.some(tag => arr_userTags.includes(tag)); group.excludeAny.some(tag => !arr_userTags.includes(tag)); return group.id === searchId; });
for...of
let result; for (const group of sortedGroups) { group.includeAll.every(tag => arr_userTags.includes(tag)); group.excludeAll.every(tag => !arr_userTags.includes(tag)); group.includeAny.some(tag => arr_userTags.includes(tag)); group.excludeAny.some(tag => !arr_userTags.includes(tag)); if (group.id === searchId) { result = group; break; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
filter
find
for...of

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring performance in JavaScript is crucial for developers to optimize their applications' speed and efficiency.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition JSON:

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark defines two functions: `filteredGroups` (filter) and `group` (find).

*   **Filter**: This function filters an array of groups based on several conditions:
    *   It checks if each group includes all tags present in the `arr_userTags` array using `every`.
    *   It excludes any tag not present in the `arr_userTags` array using `!every`.
    *   It also checks for inclusion using `some`, which is not necessary here since we are checking for every.
    *   Finally, it returns a group if its ID matches the specified searchId.

*   **Find**: This function finds an element in an array based on a condition. Here, it's looking for a group with all included tags and then excluding any tag not present in `arr_userTags`. It also looks for a specific group by matching the searchId.

Now let's talk about options being compared.

There are three functions that filter groups: `filteredGroups`, `group` (filter), and `group` (find).

1.  **Method filtering groups**: Both `group` methods work with the same data, but with different logic for excluding elements from arrays.
    *   For both methods:
        *   The `every` method uses a callback function that returns true if all elements pass the test, and it short-circuits as soon as it encounters an element for which the function returns false. This is useful when you want to stop iterating over an array once you find what you're looking for.
        *   However, it has some drawbacks:
            *   If the array contains many elements, it might take a long time.
            *   For arrays with large numbers of items, it's faster to check each item individually. The problem is that using every() causes an entire iteration over the data and may lead to performance issues if you're dealing with very large arrays
        *   On the other hand, `some()` has similar performance characteristics.
    *   But there are some differences between them:
        +   When using `every`, we return 0 or false if a condition is not met. So it returns immediately after finding what we want.
        +   Using `some()` works similarly but will always return true as soon as the first element passes the test, so it's also more likely to find what you're looking for faster
2.  **Method finding elements**: There is only one method that finds an element by searching through all of the array using a loop (`for...of`)
    *   This approach can be faster if the search pattern isn't too specific or complex since it's not limited by `every()` and `some()`
3.  The results are being compared in terms of execution speed.

Finally, looking at the benchmark results, we see that each function has a different performance:

*   **Find**: Finds an element based on the presence of certain tags.
    *   It is slower than filtering arrays because it searches through all elements before returning what you're looking for.
*   **Filter**: Filters groups based on several conditions (tag inclusion and exclusion).
    *   This method is slightly faster because it avoids unnecessary iterations over large data sets
*   **For...of Loop**: Iterates through the array to find a specific group with matching IDs.
    *   It's slower than `find` or `filter`, as it requires scanning through all elements of the array

Here are some conclusions based on these findings:

*   When filtering groups, both methods have similar performance characteristics because they use either `every()` and `some()`. However, each has different trade-offs in terms of readability and performance.
*   The "Find" method is more efficient because it only searches for an exact match with minimal comparisons instead of full iteration.

If you want to optimize your code's performance, you should consider using the most efficient algorithm. You might need to experiment with different approaches based on your specific use cases.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
filter	7127.9 Ops/sec
find	44686.8 Ops/sec
for...of	44861.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

123081230213812300812 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: filter vs find vs for...of

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

filter

find

for...of

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):