Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Includes vs. IndexOf vs. Filter vs. Find vs. FindIndex vs. Some vs. Map
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Includes vs IndexOf vs Filter vs Find vs FindIndex vs Some vs Map
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var hasZero = []; var withoutZero = []; for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { hasZero.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000)); withoutZero.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000) + 1) }
Tests:
Includes
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.includes(v => v === 0);
IndexOf
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.indexOf(0) > -1 : withoutZero.indexOf(0) > -1;
Filter
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.filter(v => v === 0);
Find
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.find(v => v === 0);
FindIndex
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.findIndex(v => v === 0);
Some
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.some(v => v === 0);
Map
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.map(v => v === 0);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (7)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Includes
IndexOf
Filter
Find
FindIndex
Some
Map
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):
**Overview of the Benchmark** The provided benchmark compares the performance of six different methods for finding elements in an array: `includes`, `indexOf`, `filter`, `find`, `findIndex`, and `some`. The test creates two arrays, `hasZero` and `withoutZero`, each with 10,000 random integers. The test then uses a randomly generated value to search for a specific element (in this case, 0) in both arrays using each of the six methods. **Methods Compared** 1. **Includes**: Checks if an element is present in an array using the `includes` method. 2. **IndexOf**: Returns the index of the first occurrence of an element in an array using the `indexOf` method. 3. **Filter**: Creates a new array with all elements that pass a test (in this case, being equal to 0) using the `filter` method. 4. **Find**: Returns the value of the first element that passes a test (in this case, being equal to 0) using the `find` method. 5. **FindIndex**: Returns the index of the first occurrence of an element in an array that passes a test (in this case, being equal to 0) using the `findIndex` method. 6. **Some**: Checks if at least one element in an array passes a test (in this case, being equal to 0) using the `some` method. 7. **Map**: Creates a new array with the results of applying a function to each element in an array using the `map` method. **Pros and Cons** * **Includes**: Simple and efficient for small arrays, but can be slow for large arrays due to its linear search algorithm. Pros: easy to use, cons: slow performance. * **IndexOf**: Returns the index of an element, which can be useful in certain scenarios. Pros: fast performance, cons: only returns the index, not the value. * **Filter**: Creates a new array with filtered elements, which can be memory-intensive for large arrays. Pros: allows for filtering and mapping, cons: creates a new array, uses more memory. * **Find**: Returns the first matching element, which can be useful in certain scenarios. Pros: fast performance, cons: only returns one value, not the entire array. * **FindIndex**: Similar to `indexOf`, but returns the index of the first occurrence. Pros: fast performance, cons: only returns an index, not the value. * **Some**: Checks if at least one element passes a test, which can be useful for early exit conditions. Pros: fast performance, cons: may not be as efficient as other methods. * **Map**: Creates a new array with transformed elements, which can be memory-intensive for large arrays. Pros: allows for transformation and filtering, cons: creates a new array, uses more memory. **Library Used** No libraries are explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's likely that some JavaScript functions (e.g., `Math.random()`, `Array.prototype.includes()`, etc.) are using built-in JavaScript libraries or implementations under the hood. **Special JS Features/Syntax** None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond basic array operations and functions like `Math.random()`. In conclusion, this benchmark provides a useful comparison of six different methods for finding elements in an array, highlighting their performance characteristics, pros, and cons. It can serve as a reference point for developers to choose the most efficient method for their specific use case.
Related benchmarks:
Some vs. Filter vs. findIndex
Some vs Filter vs indexOf vs Includes vs Find
Some vs. Filter vs. findIndex vs find
Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf vs. Map+Includes vs. Find
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?