Benchmark: Compare array find and new Map with get (3)

Script Preparation code:

var array = [{ name: 'A'}, { name: 'B'}, { name: 'C'}, { name: 'D'}, { name: 'E'}, { name: 'F'}, { name: 'G'}, { name: 'H'}, { name: 'I'}, { name: 'J'}, { name: 'K'}, { name: 'L'}, { name: 'M'}, { name: 'N'}];
var map = new Map(array.map((x) => [x.name, x]));

Tests:

array find
array.find(a => a.name === 'M')
map get
map.get('M')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array find
map get

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 what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**: The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two JavaScript methods: `Array.prototype.find()` and `Map.prototype.get()`. Both methods are used to retrieve an element from their respective data structures (an array for `Array.prototype.find()` and a Map for `Map.prototype.get()`).

**Options being compared**: In this specific benchmark, only two options are being compared:

1. **`array.find()`**: This method takes a callback function as its argument, which is executed for each element in the array until one of them satisfies the condition.
2. **`map.get()`**: This method directly returns the value associated with a given key (in this case, `'M'`) from the Map.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

* `array.find()`: Pros:
	+ Easy to understand and use for simple cases.
	+ Can be useful when you need to perform some operation on the found element.
Cons:
	+ Iterates over the entire array, which can be inefficient if the array is large.
	+ May not be as cache-friendly as `map.get()` since it involves searching for a specific key in the array.
* `map.get()`: Pros:
	+ Extremely efficient, especially when working with large data sets, since it directly accesses the associated value without iterating over the entire collection.
Cons:
	+ Requires an index (key) to be known beforehand, which might not always be available or possible.

**Library usage**: The benchmark uses two standard JavaScript libraries:

* None explicitly stated for `array.find()`, as it's a built-in method of Array objects. However, if you're using a version older than ES6, you might need to polyfill it.
* `Map` is the second library used, which is also a built-in part of modern JavaScript (introduced in ECMAScript 2015). It represents an unordered collection of key-value pairs.

**Special JS feature or syntax**: There's no special feature or syntax mentioned here. Just standard JavaScript for both methods being compared.

Now that we've explained the benchmark, let's talk about other alternatives:

In general, you could also compare `forEach()` and a similar method (if available) in the specific data structure (e.g., `array.forEach()`, `map.forEach()`). However, since these methods are not as efficient as directly accessing elements by key like with `map.get()`, they're usually used for different purposes or when certain features (like support for async iteration) aren't available.

Other alternatives might include:

* `for...of` loop
* `while` loop

However, these would not be ideal choices for this specific benchmark since they'd still require iterating over the entire collection in some form.

Related benchmarks:

Compare array find and new Map with get (3) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: array find vs map get

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array find

map get

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):