Benchmark: Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf vs. Includes vs. Find - nested#2234

Script Preparation code:

var array = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
  const obj = {
    data: {
      bool: !!Math.floor(Math.random() * 100 > 75)
    },
    str: Math.floor(Math.random() * 100)
  };
  array.push(obj);
  array.push({...obj, str: obj.str + 1 });
}

Tests:

Array.filter
var tempResult = array.filter(({ data, str }) => { const shouldBeTrue = data.bool; const isSmall = str < 2; return shouldBeTrue && isSmall; });
Array.find
var tempResult = array.find(({ data, str }) => { const shouldBeTrue = data.bool; const isSmall = str < 2; return shouldBeTrue && isSmall; });
Array.includes
var tempResult = array.includes(({ data, str }) => { const shouldBeTrue = data.bool; const isSmall = str < 2; return shouldBeTrue && isSmall; });
Array.reduce
var tempResult = array.reduce((found, { data, str }) => { const shouldBeTrue = data.bool; const isSmall = str < 2; if(shouldBeTrue && isSmall) { return { count: found.count + 1 }; } else { return found; } }, { found: 0 });
for
var tempResult = []; for (var i = 0; i < array.length; i++) { const {data, str} = array[i]; const shouldBeTrue = data.bool; const isSmall = str < 2; if(shouldBeTrue && isSmall) { tempResult.push(array[i]); } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.filter
Array.find
Array.includes
Array.reduce
for

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.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark tests various JavaScript array methods to find elements that meet specific conditions. The test case uses a large array of objects with random data, including boolean values and string properties. The goal is to compare the performance of different methods in filtering, finding, and reducing arrays.

**Test Cases**

There are four main test cases:

1. `Array.filter`
2. `Array.find`
3. `Array.includes`
4. `Array.reduce`

**Options Compared**

Each test case compares a different approach for finding elements that meet the specified conditions:

* `Array.filter`: Returns a new array with all elements that pass the test.
* `Array.find`: Returns the first element that passes the test, or undefined if no element is found.
* `Array.includes`: Checks if an array includes an element with the specified condition.
* `Array.reduce`: Reduces the array to a single value by applying a callback function to each element.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons for each approach:

1. `Array.filter`:
	* Pros: Returns a new array, can be used with other methods (e.g., `map`, `every`), and is generally more efficient than `Array.find`.
	* Cons: Creates a new array, which can lead to memory issues for large datasets.
2. `Array.find`:
	* Pros: Returns the first matching element, can be more readable for simple cases, and doesn't create a new array.
	* Cons: Returns undefined if no element is found, can be slower than `Array.filter`.
3. `Array.includes`:
	* Pros: Checks if an element exists in the array without modifying it, can be faster than filtering or finding.
	* Cons: Not as flexible as other methods, doesn't return a boolean value (returns a boolean result).
4. `Array.reduce`:
	* Pros: Reduces the array to a single value, can be used for aggregation operations.
	* Cons: Can be slower than filtering or finding due to its overhead, not designed for simple array element checks.

**Other Considerations**

* **Memory allocation**: Creating new arrays using methods like `Array.filter` and `Array.find` can lead to memory issues if the dataset is very large. In contrast, `Array.includes` doesn't create a new array.
* **Readability**: Some developers may prefer the simplicity of `Array.find`, while others might find it less readable due to its return type (undefined).
* **Performance**: The choice between filtering and finding depends on the specific use case. Filtering can be faster for large datasets, but finds can be more efficient for small arrays or when only one element is expected.

**Alternatives**

If you don't have access to these methods or want to implement your own:

* Use a custom implementation of array filters or finds using loops.
* Utilize other libraries like Lodash or underscore.js, which provide similar functionality with more concise syntax.
* Consider using `Array.prototype.every` for inclusive filtering (returns an array of all elements that meet the condition).

Keep in mind that each approach has its trade-offs and may be suited better for specific use cases.

Related benchmarks:

Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf vs. Includes vs. Find - nested#2234 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.filter vs Array.find vs Array.includes vs Array.reduce vs for

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.filter

Array.find

Array.includes

Array.reduce

for

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):