Benchmark: Test_every - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var array_1 = [{id: 1}, {id: 2}, {id: 3}, {id: 4}, {id: 5}];
var array_2 = [{id: 6}, {id: 7}, {id: 8}];
var array_3 = [{id: 9}, {id: 10}, {id: 11}, {id: 12}, {id: 13}];

var ids_to_check = [1, 5, 8, 6, 11, 3];

Tests:

test_1
var joined_array = [ array_1, array_2, array_3, ] var counter = 0; joined_array.every(array => { array.every(object => { if (ids_to_check.includes(object.id)) { counter++; } return counter >= ids_to_check.length; }); return counter >= ids_to_check.length; })
test_2
var joined_array = [ ...array_1, ...array_2, ...array_3, ] var counter = 0; joined_array.every(object => { if (ids_to_check.includes(object.id)) { counter++; } return counter >= ids_to_check.length; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test_1
test_2

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 gemma2:9b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

This benchmark tests the performance of two different approaches to checking if specific IDs exist within multiple arrays using JavaScript's `every()` method.

**Option 1: (`test_1`)**

* **Code:**  The code first joins all three arrays (`array_1`, `array_2`, `array_3`) into a single `joined_array`. Then, it uses nested `every()` methods to iterate through each element in the joined array. Inside the nested loops, it checks if the object's `id` property is present in the `ids_to_check` array. If found, a counter is incremented. The outer `every()` method returns `true` only when all elements have been checked and the counter reaches the length of `ids_to_check`, signifying that all target IDs were found.

* **Pros:**  Potentially more readable due to the clear nesting structure.
* **Cons:** Could be slightly less performant than Option 2 because it iterates through all objects in the joined array, even if a target ID is found early on.

**Option 2: (`test_2`)**

* **Code:** This option directly uses the spread syntax (`...`) to flatten the three arrays into a single `joined_array`.  It then iterates through each object in this array using another `every()` method. For each object, it checks if its `id` is present in `ids_to_check`.

* **Pros:** Potentially more performant because it avoids nested loops and stops iterating as soon as a target ID is found.
* **Cons:** Might be slightly less readable due to the use of spread syntax and potentially fewer clear visual separations between iterations.

**Considerations:**

*  The choice between these two approaches depends on the specific context and size of the arrays involved. For very large datasets, the performance difference might become more noticeable. 
* You can also experiment with other methods like `filter()` or `find()` to see if they offer better performance for your use case.

Let me know if you'd like a deeper dive into any particular aspect or have other questions!

Related benchmarks:

Test_every (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: test_1 vs test_2

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

test_1

test_2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated one year ago):