Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
findindex vs map && indexOf
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
findIndex vs map && indexOf
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = new Array(15000); arr.fill({ id: 0 }); arr = arr.map((el, idx) => el.id = idx); var foo = Math.floor(Math.random() * 15000);
Tests:
findIndex
const userIdx = arr.findIndex(user => user.id === foo);
map && indexOf
const userIdx = arr.map(user => user.id).indexOf(foo);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
findIndex
map && indexOf
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 benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark compares two approaches to find an element in an array: `findIndex` and `map && indexOf`. The test case creates an array of 15,000 elements with a unique `id` property, fills it with random values, and then searches for a specific `id` value using both methods. **Options Compared** The two options being compared are: 1. **`findIndex`**: This method returns the index of the first element in the array that satisfies the provided condition (in this case, `user.id === foo`). It's a linear search algorithm. 2. **`map && indexOf`**: This approach uses the `map()` method to create a new array with transformed elements, and then uses the `indexOf()` method to find the index of the desired value in the resulting array. **Pros and Cons** 1. **`findIndex`**: * Pros: Simple, efficient for large arrays. * Cons: Linear search can be slow for small arrays or when the condition is not met at all. 2. **`map && indexOf`**: * Pros: Can be faster than `findIndex` for large arrays because it avoids the need to check each element multiple times. * Cons: Creates a new array, which can consume more memory; uses two method calls, which might incur additional overhead. **Library and Special Features** There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark. However, the `map()` and `indexOf()` methods are part of the built-in JavaScript API. The test case does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's considered standard. **Other Alternatives** In addition to the two options being compared, other approaches to find an element in an array might include: 1. **`forEach()`**: Iterates over each element and checks if it matches the condition. 2. **`filter()`**: Creates a new array with elements that satisfy the condition, but does not provide an index of the matching element. 3. **`reduce()`**: Accumulates values while iterating over the array, which might be useful in certain scenarios. The choice of approach depends on the specific requirements and constraints of the application.
Related benchmarks:
findIndex vs map & indexOf
findIndex vs indexOf - JavaScript performance
findIndex vs map & indexOf vs find
Comparing findIndex with map & indexOf
findIndex vs IndexOf + map
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?