Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Test Alex hoho
(version: 0)
Test the real shit
Comparing performance of:
FindIndex vs IndexOf
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = new Array(15000000); arr.fill({ id: 0 }); arr = arr.map((el, idx) => el.id = idx); var foo = Math.floor(Math.random() * 15000000);
Tests:
FindIndex
var index = arr.findIndex((num) => num === foo);
IndexOf
var index = arr.indexOf(foo);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
FindIndex
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):
I'll break down the benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition:** The provided JSON defines a JavaScript microbenchmark, which is a small code snippet used to measure performance. In this case, there are two benchmarks: 1. `FindIndex`: Tests the `findIndex` method of an array. 2. `IndexOf`: Tests the `indexOf` method of an array. **Options compared:** In this benchmark, two options are being compared: * `findIndex` * `indexOf` These two methods seem to serve similar purposes: finding the index of a specific element in an array. However, they have some differences: * `findIndex` returns `-1` if the element is not found, while `indexOf` throws an error (`-1` is returned instead). * `findIndex` can be used with any iterable (not just arrays), while `indexOf` is specifically designed for arrays. * Performance: Some benchmarks suggest that `indexOf` might be slightly faster than `findIndex`, but this can vary depending on the specific use case. **Pros and Cons of each approach:** * `findIndex`: + Pros: More flexible, handles non-array iterables, and throws an error if not found. + Cons: May have additional overhead due to its more general-purpose design. * `indexOf`: + Pros: More optimized for array performance, has built-in support for early returns. + Cons: Limited scope, only works with arrays. **Other considerations:** * The benchmark uses a large array (`arr`) and generates a random index (`foo`) to test the performance of both methods. This might be relevant if you're working with large datasets or need to find elements in dense data structures. * The `Math.floor` function is used to convert the result of `Math.random()` to an integer, which ensures that the generated indices are integers. **Library usage:** None **Special JS features or syntax:** The benchmark uses the following special JavaScript feature: * `Map` function (`arr.map((el, idx) => el.id = idx)`): This is a modern JavaScript feature that creates a new array with the results of applying a provided function to each element in the original array. In this case, it's used to create an array of indices by modifying the elements. **Alternatives:** If you're looking for alternative methods to find an index in an array, consider: * `Array.prototype.indexOf()` (or `Array.prototype.lastIndexOf()`) with a loop to iterate through the array * Using a library like Lodash (`_.findIndex()` or `_.indexOf()`) * Implementing your own binary search algorithm Keep in mind that these alternatives might have different performance characteristics and use cases compared to `findIndex` and `indexOf`.
Related benchmarks:
Fill array with random integers
array vs int16array
array vs int16array try catch
array vs float64 for io and slice
array vs float64 for io and slice (fixed)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?