Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Some vs. Find
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Array.some vs Array.find
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var hasZero = []; var withoutZero = []; for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { hasZero.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000)); withoutZero.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000) + 1) }
Tests:
Array.some
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.some(v => v === 0);
Array.find
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.find(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.find(v => v === 0);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Array.some
Array.find
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and some considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches for checking if an array contains a specific value: `Array.some` and `Array.find`. The script preparation code generates two arrays, `hasZero` and `withoutZero`, each containing 10,000 random integers between 0 and 1000. One array always includes zero (either at the beginning or end), while the other does not. **Script Preparation Code** The script prepares the test data by creating two empty arrays, `hasZero` and `withoutZero`. Then, it uses a loop to populate these arrays with random integers. The purpose of using `Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000)` is to generate random numbers between 0 and 999. Adding 1 to the random number in the second array ensures that zero is never included. **Html Preparation Code** There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that this benchmark only tests the JavaScript engine's performance without considering any HTML-related aspects. **Individual Test Cases** The benchmark has two test cases: 1. `Array.some`: This test case uses the `some()` method to check if at least one element in the array matches a specific condition (in this case, being equal to zero). 2. `Array.find`: This test case uses the `find()` method to retrieve the first element that satisfies a given condition (in this case, being equal to zero). **Library and Purpose** Neither `Array.some` nor `Array.find` rely on external libraries. These methods are native JavaScript functions that can be used directly in any JavaScript application. However, it's worth noting that the `Math.round()` function is used with a bitwise NOT operator (`!!`) to simulate a scenario where the test case might encounter NaN (Not a Number) values due to floating-point arithmetic issues. In some cases, using `Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000)` can result in zero being rounded to a value very close to zero, causing `NaN` when applying the bitwise NOT operator. **Special JS Feature** The use of `!!` with `Math.round()` is an example of a special JavaScript feature called "bitwise not" or "Boolean negation." It's used to convert a number to a Boolean value. In this context, it's used to simulate a condition where the presence of zero would trigger the test case. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in creating similar benchmarks for other JavaScript functions, some alternatives include: * `Array.includes()`: This method is similar to `some()` but returns only the first occurrence that matches the given condition. * `Array.prototype.every()`: This method checks if all elements in an array satisfy a given condition.
Related benchmarks:
Fill array with random integers
Array .push() vs .unshift() with random numbers
JavaScript Array.slice vs Array.slice(0)
.at vs [x]
Spread Operator VS Array.prototype.slice() VS Array.prototype.slice(0)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?