Benchmark: Fastest way to check if array have an element returning true or false (2)

Fastest way to check if array have an element returning true or false (2) (version: 0)

[1,2, 3, 4, 5].indexOf(4) !== -1 [1,2, 3, 4, 5].filter(a=> a ===4).length > 0 [1,2, 3, 4, 5].find(a => a === 4) !== undefined [1,2, 3, 4, 5].some( a => a === 4) ![1,2, 3, 4, 5].every( a => a !== 4) [1,2, 3, 4, 5].lastIndexOf(4) !== -1 [1,2, 3, 4, 5].includes(4)

Comparing performance of: indexOf !== vs filter length > 0 vs find !== undefined vs some vs ! every vs lastIndexOf !== -1 vs includes

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Tests:

indexOf !==
[1,2, 3, 4, 5].indexOf(4) !== -1
filter length > 0
[1,2, 3, 4, 5].filter(a=> a ===4).length > 0
find !== undefined
[1,2, 3, 4, 5].find(a => a === 4) !== undefined
some
[1,2, 3, 4, 5].some( a => a === 4)
! every
![1,2, 3, 4, 5].every( a => a !== 4)
lastIndexOf !== -1
[1,2, 3, 4, 5].lastIndexOf(4) !== -1
includes
[1,2, 3, 4, 5].includes(4)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
indexOf !==
filter length > 0
find !== undefined
some
! every
lastIndexOf !== -1
includes

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of JavaScript array operations is crucial for optimizing code and improving application performance.

**What's being tested?**

The benchmark tests six different ways to check if an element exists in an array:

1. `indexOf` method returning a non-negative value
2. Filtering out elements using `filter`
3. Finding the first occurrence using `find`
4. Checking if any element matches a condition using `some`
5. Verifying that all elements do not match a condition using `every`
6. Using the `includes` method

**Options compared**

The benchmark compares two main approaches for each test case:

1. Traditional approach: using an explicit loop or array iteration to check for existence.
2. Modern approach: leveraging built-in methods like `indexOf`, `filter`, `find`, `some`, and `includes`.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

Here's a brief summary of the advantages and disadvantages of each approach:

**Traditional Approach (Explicit Loop)**

Pros:

* Well-understood, straightforward algorithm
* Suitable for low-level, manual optimization

Cons:

* Verbose code can be slower than modern methods
* Error-prone if not implemented correctly

**Modern Approach (Built-in Methods)**

Pros:

* Built-in methods are optimized and efficient
* Typically faster than traditional approaches

Cons:

* May have limitations or quirks depending on the method used
* Can lead to increased complexity in codebase if not understood properly

**Other considerations**

When choosing an approach, consider the following factors:

* Code readability: how well does the chosen approach convey the intention of the code?
* Performance: are there specific performance requirements that need to be met?
* Maintainability: which approach is easier to understand and modify in the future?

For example, using `includes` might be more readable than implementing a custom search function.

**Library or special JS feature**

The benchmark uses JavaScript's built-in array methods, such as `indexOf`, `filter`, `find`, `some`, and `includes`. These methods are part of the ECMAScript standard and have been implemented by various browsers to provide consistent behavior across different environments.

There is no specific library or special JS feature used in this benchmark. The focus is on measuring the performance of the built-in array methods themselves.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for checking array element existence could be:

* Using a `for` loop with indexing
* Implementing a custom search function using binary search
* Utilizing a library like Lodash (which provides an `includes` method)

However, these approaches are not typically used in production code due to performance considerations and the availability of optimized built-in methods.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/84.0.4147.89 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 84 on Mac OS X 10.15.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
indexOf !==	81824208.0 Ops/sec
filter length > 0	27621836.0 Ops/sec
find !== undefined	5076108.5 Ops/sec
some	167872016.0 Ops/sec
! every	161710352.0 Ops/sec
lastIndexOf !== -1	48612192.0 Ops/sec
includes	776728896.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Fastest way to check if array have an element returning true or false (2) (version: 0)

[1,2, 3, 4, 5].indexOf(4) !== -1 [1,2, 3, 4, 5].filter(a=> a ===4).length > 0 [1,2, 3, 4, 5].find(a => a === 4) !== undefined [1,2, 3, 4, 5].some( a => a === 4) ![1,2, 3, 4, 5].every( a => a !== 4) [1,2, 3, 4, 5].lastIndexOf(4) !== -1 [1,2, 3, 4, 5].includes(4)

Comparing performance of: indexOf !== vs filter length > 0 vs find !== undefined vs some vs ! every vs lastIndexOf !== -1 vs includes

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

indexOf !==

filter length > 0

find !== undefined

some

! every

lastIndexOf !== -1

includes

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):