Benchmark: native reverse find vs native array findLast

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.11/lodash.core.js"></script>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var users = [
  { 'user': 'joey',  'age': 32 },
  { 'user': 'ross',    'age': 41 },
  { 'user': 'joey',  'age': 32 },
  { 'user': 'ross',    'age': 41 },
  { 'user': 'joey',  'age': 32 },
  { 'user': 'ross',    'age': 41 },
  { 'user': 'joey',  'age': 32 },
  { 'user': 'ross',    'age': 41 },
  { 'user': 'chandler', 'age': 39 }
]

Tests:

array find
// Native users.slice().reverse().find(function (o) { return o.age < 40; })
array findlast
users.slice().findLast(function (o) { return o.age < 40; })

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 38 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 38 runs

array find

17.0M/s

array findlast

16.1M/s

View exact numbers

✓ array find: 16,990,728 ops/sec
• array findlast: 16,132,888 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array find
array findlast

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/136.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 136 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

array find

68.7M/s

array findlast

40.9M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ array find	68,665,960 Ops/sec
array findlast	40,851,532 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark definition and results.

**Benchmark Name**: native reverse find vs native array findLast

**Description**: Compare two ways to find an element in an array that meets a certain condition: using the `slice()`, `reverse()`, and `find()` methods, versus using the `findLast()` method.

**Test Cases**: There are two test cases:

1. **array find**: This test uses the `users.slice().reverse().find()` method to find an element in the `users` array where the age is less than 40.
2. **array findlast**: This test uses the `users.findLast()` method (which is a part of the Lodash library) to find the last element in the `users` array that meets the same condition.

**Library Used**: The Lodash library is used in this benchmark, specifically its `findLast()` function. Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides additional functions for tasks such as array manipulation, object creation, and string manipulation.

**JavaScript Features/Syntax Used**: None specific to new ES6 features or syntax are used in this benchmark.

**What's Being Tested**: The primary goal of this benchmark is to compare the performance of two methods for finding an element in an array that meets a certain condition: using the `find()` method after reversing the array, versus using the `findLast()` method provided by Lodash.

**Pros and Cons**:

* **Native Method (array find)**:
	+ Pros: No external library dependencies.
	+ Cons: Requires extra memory and CPU cycles to reverse the entire array before finding the element.
* **Lodash Method (array findlast)**:
	+ Pros: More efficient, as it only iterates over the array once.
	+ Cons: Requires an additional library dependency.

**Other Alternatives**: Some possible alternatives to this benchmark could be:

1. Using a simple `for` loop or `while` loop to iterate over the array and find the element manually.
2. Using other utility libraries like Underscore.js or Ramda.js, which also provide similar functionality.
3. Benchmarking different sorting algorithms to see which one performs best for this use case.

**Considerations**: When designing benchmarks, it's essential to consider factors such as:

* The type of data being used (e.g., small vs large arrays).
* The specific conditions that need to be met (e.g., age less than 40).
* The performance characteristics of different browsers and devices.
* The implications for real-world use cases, where memory and CPU efficiency are crucial.

native reverse find vs native array findLast (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: `array find vs array findlast`

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

array find

array findlast

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 38 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 38 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):

native reverse find vs native array findLast (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: array find vs array findlast

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

array find

array findlast

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 38 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 38 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `array find vs array findlast`