Benchmark: indexOf vs map on smaller arrays

Script Preparation code:

var array = [];
for (var i=0; i<50; ++i) {
  	array.push(i);
}

function hasWithIndexOf(needle) {
	return array.indexOf(needle) !== -1;
}

function hasWithMap(needle) {
	return array.map((e,i) => {
		return e === needle;
	});
}

Tests:

indexOf
for (var i=0; i<100; ++i) { hasWithIndexOf(5); }
map
for (var i=0; i<100; ++i) { hasWithMap(5); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
indexOf
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined by two functions, `hasWithIndexOf` and `hasWithMap`, which are used to search for a specific value (in this case, `5`) in an array. The array is created dynamically using a `for` loop that pushes numbers from 0 to 49 onto it.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:

1. **`hasWithIndexOf`**: This function uses the traditional `indexOf` method to search for the value in the array.
2. **`hasWithMap`**: This function uses the `map()` method to create a new array with the same values, and then checks if the desired value is present in that array using an `if` statement.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **`hasWithIndexOf`**:
	* Pros: Efficient for small arrays, simple to implement.
	* Cons: May have performance issues with large arrays due to its linear search nature.
2. **`hasWithMap`**:
	* Pros: Can be efficient for larger arrays, as it uses a hash table-like data structure.
	* Cons: Creates an additional array and performs more computations, which can be overkill for small arrays.

**Library Used**

The `map()` function is a built-in JavaScript method that creates a new array by applying a provided function to each element in the original array. In this case, it's used to create a new array with the same values as the original array, but only containing the elements that match the desired value.

**Special JS Feature**

This benchmark doesn't use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's commonly available in modern browsers.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to compare performance for larger arrays or different search methods, you could consider adding more test cases. Some alternatives might include:

* Using a more efficient data structure, such as a `Set` or a `Map`, instead of an array.
* Comparing the performance of other search algorithms, such as binary search or interpolation search.
* Testing with different browser versions or configurations to see how they impact performance.

Overall, this benchmark provides a simple and straightforward comparison between two common approaches to searching arrays in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

indexOf vs map on smaller arrays (version: 0)

indexOf vs map on small arrays

Comparing performance of: indexOf vs map

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

indexOf

map

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):