Benchmark: fastfindindex - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var arr = []
for (let i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
    arr.push(i)
}


let index = -1

function getIndex(idx) {
    for (let i = 0, len = arr.length; i < len; i++) {
        if (arr[i] === idx) {
            return i
        }
    }
}

Tests:

for
index = getIndex(40)
findIndex
index = arr.findIndex(t => t === 40)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
findIndex

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/125.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 125 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

findIndex

9.3M/s

for

674K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ findIndex	9,337,637 Ops/sec
for	673,577 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark for comparing the performance of two approaches to find an element in an array: a traditional `for` loop and the `findIndex` method.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition consists of two parts:

1. **Script Preparation Code**: This code creates an array of 100 elements and defines a function `getIndex` that takes an index as an argument. The function iterates through the array to find the element at the given index.
2. **Html Preparation Code**: This field is empty, indicating that no HTML-related setup is required for the benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

The test cases compare the performance of two approaches:

1. **"for"**: This test case uses a traditional `for` loop to find the element at index 40 in the array.
2. **"findIndex"**: This test case uses the `findIndex` method with a callback function to find the element at index 40 in the array.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of two options:

1. **Traditional `for` loop**
2. **`findIndex` method**

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **Traditional `for` loop**:
	* Pros:
		+ Easy to understand and implement.
		+ No additional dependencies or libraries required.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slow for large arrays due to the overhead of iterating through each element.
2. **`findIndex` method**:
	* Pros:
		+ Fast and efficient, especially for large arrays.
		+ Eliminates the need for manual iteration through each element.
	* Cons:
		+ May require additional dependencies or libraries (e.g., modern JavaScript features).
		+ Less intuitive to use compared to traditional `for` loops.

**Library: `findIndex`**

The `findIndex` method is a built-in method in modern JavaScript that returns the index of the first element in an array that satisfies the provided condition. In this benchmark, it is used with a callback function to find the element at index 40.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes required for this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

For finding an element in an array, other alternatives to `findIndex` include:

1. **`indexOf()`**: A built-in method that returns the index of the first occurrence of a specified value.
2. **Manual iteration through each element using a variable**: Similar to the traditional `for` loop approach used in this benchmark.

However, these alternatives may not be as efficient or modern as the `findIndex` method for large arrays.

**Interpretation of Benchmark Results**

The latest benchmark results show that:

* The `findIndex` method is significantly faster than the traditional `for` loop approach.
* Chrome 125 on Linux is the fastest browser to execute the benchmark.

Overall, this benchmark provides a useful comparison between two common approaches to finding an element in an array, highlighting the benefits of using modern JavaScript methods like `findIndex`.

fastfindindex (version: 0)

for and findIndex

Comparing performance of: `for vs findIndex`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

for

findIndex

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

fastfindindex (version: 0)

for and findIndex

Comparing performance of: for vs findIndex

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

for

findIndex

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Comparing performance of: `for vs findIndex`