Benchmark: for vs find - with lowerCase

Tests:

for
const arr = ['fIrSt', 'sEcOnD', 'tHiRd', 'fOuRtH', 'FIfth', 'SiXTh', 'Seventh', 'EIGHTH', 'NINTH', 'tenth']; function existsInArr(arr, val) { for (const x of arr) { if(x.toLowerCase() === val.toLowerCase()) { return true; } } return false; } arr.forEach(val => console.log(existsInArr(arr, val)));
find
const arr = ['fIrSt', 'sEcOnD', 'tHiRd', 'fOuRtH', 'FIfth', 'SiXTh', 'Seventh', 'EIGHTH', 'NINTH', 'tenth']; function existsInArr(arr, val) { return arr.find(x => x.toLowerCase() === val.toLowerCase()) ? true : false; } arr.forEach(val => console.log(existsInArr(arr, val)));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark in question compares two approaches for searching an array: the `for` loop and the `find()` method.

**Tested Options**

The two options being compared are:

1. **For Loop**: A traditional, iterative approach using a `for` loop to iterate over the array.
2. **Find() Method**: A functional programming approach using the `Array.prototype.find()` method to search for an element in the array.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**For Loop:**

Pros:

* Wide support across browsers and platforms
* Easy to understand and maintain, especially for those familiar with traditional loops

Cons:

* Can be slower than other approaches due to overhead from checking each iteration
* May require more manual optimization, such as using `break` statements or early returns

**Find() Method:**

Pros:

* Faster execution time, as it stops iterating as soon as the condition is met
* Less prone to errors, as it's a built-in method with fewer opportunities for mistakes

Cons:

* Requires support for modern JavaScript features (ES6+)
* May not work in older browsers or platforms that don't support `find()`

**Library Used**

In both test cases, no external libraries are used beyond the standard JavaScript functionality.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

Neither of these benchmark tests utilizes any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's necessary for the comparisons. The `for` loop uses a traditional `for` loop, while the `find()` method is a built-in Array prototype method.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to test an array search using other methods, you might consider:

* Using `some()` instead of `find()`: This method returns true as soon as at least one element matches the condition.
* Using a regular expression: If you need to perform more complex pattern matching, regex might be a viable alternative.
* Using a custom binary search algorithm: For large arrays, this could provide faster results.

However, for most use cases, the `find()` method remains a popular and efficient choice.

Related benchmarks:

for vs find - with lowerCase (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for vs find

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for

find

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):