Benchmark: array to map and find small vs array find small again

Script Preparation code:

var arr = Array.from({length: 100}).map((_,i) => ({id: i}));
var findTargets = Array.from({length: 100}).map((_,i) => idGen());
function idGen() {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) % 100
}

Tests:

array to map and find
const arrMap = new Map(arr.entries()) findTargets.forEach(target => arrMap.get(target));
array find
findTargets.forEach(target => arr.find(i => i.id === target));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array to map and find
array 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.

Let's break down the provided JSON for the benchmark test and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark consists of two individual test cases:

1. `array to map and find small vs array find small again`: This test compares two approaches:
	* Creating a Map (`arrMap`) from an array using `new Map(arr.entries())` and then iterating over the array's entries to find matching elements.
	* Iterating directly over the original array (`arr`) using `find()` with a callback function that checks for the existence of each element in the `findTargets` array.
2. `array find`: This test only compares two approaches:
	* Using `find()` with a callback function to find an element in the array.
	* Not specified, likely no additional methods compared.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark tests the following options:

1. Creating a Map (`arrMap`) vs direct iteration over the array for finding matching elements.
2. Iterating directly over the original array (`arr`) using `find()` with a callback function vs iterating over another array (`findTargets`) to check for matches.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Creating a Map (arrMap)**:
	* Pros: Fast lookup times, efficient memory usage.
	* Cons: Requires additional memory allocation, potentially slower initial setup due to map creation.
2. **Direct Iteration over Array (`arr`)**:
	* Pros: Faster execution, less memory allocation required.
	* Cons: Less efficient lookup times, more complex iteration logic.

**Other Considerations**

1. The test uses the `idGen()` function to generate random IDs for the `findTargets` array. This function is not specified in the provided JSON, but it's likely a simple function that returns a unique ID.
2. Both tests use the same input data: an array of 100 elements and another array of 100 random IDs.

**Library and Purpose**

In this benchmark, the `Map` object is used as a library to create a data structure for efficient lookup. The purpose of using `Map` is to take advantage of its fast lookups, which can improve performance in certain scenarios.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided JSON.

**Alternative Approaches**

Some alternative approaches that could be considered for this benchmark:

1. Using a different data structure, such as an object with properties matching the `findTargets` array.
2. Employing parallel processing techniques to speed up both tests.
3. Using caching mechanisms to store previously computed results for repeated iterations.
4. Optimizing the `idGen()` function for faster ID generation.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be applicable or beneficial depending on the specific requirements and constraints of the project.

Related benchmarks:

array to map and find small vs array find small again (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: array to map and find vs array find

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array to map and find

array 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):