Benchmark: Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf (somefixes)

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.filter
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.filter(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.filter(v => v === 0);
Array.indexOf
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.indexOf(0) !== -1 : withoutZero.indexOf(0) !== -1;
Array.indexOf old
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.indexOf(0) > -1 : withoutZero.indexOf(0) > -1;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.some
Array.filter
Array.indexOf
Array.indexOf old

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided benchmark tests the performance of three different approaches to check if an array contains a zero value:

1. **Array.some**: This method returns true as soon as it finds an element in the array that satisfies the provided condition (in this case, `v === 0`). It stops iterating over the array once it finds the first match.
2. **Array.filter**: This method returns a new array containing only the elements of the original array for which the provided condition is true (in this case, `v === 0`). It continues to iterate over the entire array and filters out all non-matching elements.
3. **Array.indexOf**: This method returns the index of the first element in the array that matches the provided value (in this case, `0`). If no such element is found, it returns -1.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Array.some**:
	+ Pros: Efficient for small to medium-sized arrays, can stop iterating once a match is found.
	+ Cons: May not be as efficient for large arrays due to the potential for multiple iterations if all elements are non-matching.
* **Array.filter**:
	+ Pros: Can handle large arrays efficiently by creating a new array with filtered elements.
	+ Cons: Requires more memory and CPU cycles compared to Array.some, especially for small arrays.
* **Array.indexOf**:
	+ Pros: Simple and efficient for finding the first occurrence of an element.
	+ Cons: Returns -1 if no matching element is found, which may be unexpected behavior in some cases.

Other considerations:

* The use of `Math.round(Math.random())` to introduce randomness in the benchmark ensures that the results are not biased towards specific cases.
* The large array size (10,000 elements) and the presence of "somefixes" suggest that the benchmark is designed to test performance under stress conditions.

The alternative approaches to this benchmark would be:

1. **Array.reduce**: Instead of using some, filter, or indexOf, you could use Array.reduce to find the first occurrence of a zero value.
2. **Linear search**: You could implement a linear search algorithm (e.g., checking each element in sequence) as an alternative to Array.indexOf.

The libraries used in this benchmark are:

* None explicitly mentioned, but JavaScript's built-in array methods and the `Math` library are assumed.

No special JavaScript features or syntax are being tested in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that more advanced techniques like parallel processing, async programming, or WebAssembly might be tested in other benchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

Related benchmarks:

Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf (somefixes) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.some vs Array.filter vs Array.indexOf vs Array.indexOf old

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.some

Array.filter

Array.indexOf

Array.indexOf old

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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