Benchmark: Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf vs. includes Fork

Script Preparation code:

var hasZero = [];
var withoutZero = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
  hasZero.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000));
  withoutZero.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000) + 1)
}

Tests:

Array.some
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.some(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.some(v => v === 0);
Array.filter
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.filter(v => v === 0) : withoutZero.filter(v => v === 0);
Array.indexOf
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.indexOf(0) > -1 : withoutZero.indexOf(0) > -1;
Array.includes
var tempResult = !!Math.round(Math.random()) ? hasZero.includes(0) : withoutZero.includes(0);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.some
Array.filter
Array.indexOf
Array.includes

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/119.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 119 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Array.includes

6.4M/s

Array.some

6.1M/s

Array.indexOf

6.0M/s

Array.filter

5.8M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Array.includes	6,361,326 Ops/sec
Array.some	6,097,792 Ops/sec
Array.indexOf	6,037,983 Ops/sec
Array.filter	5,793,176 Ops/sec

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 the provided JSON benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares four different approaches to check if an element (in this case, 0) exists in an array:

1. `Array.some()`: Returns `true` if at least one element of the array satisfies the provided condition.
2. `Array.filter()`: Returns a new array with all elements that satisfy the provided condition.
3. `Array.indexOf()`: Returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value, or `-1` if not found.
4. `Array.includes()`: Returns `true` if an element is found in the array, otherwise `false`.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares these four approaches to perform a simple check (i.e., checking if 0 exists in the array). Each approach has its own strengths and weaknesses:

* **Array.some()**: Pros:
	+ Efficient for arrays with many elements (it stops iterating as soon as it finds a match).
	+ Can be used for multiple conditions by chaining method calls.
* Cons:
	+ May not be the best choice for arrays with only one element, as it will always return `true`.
* **Array.filter()**: Pros:
	+ Returns a new array with all matching elements, which can be useful in some cases (e.g., transformation).
* Cons:
	+ Creates a new array and modifies the original, which may not be desirable.
	+ Can be slower for small arrays due to the overhead of creating a new array.
* **Array.indexOf()**: Pros:
	+ Efficient for arrays with many elements (it stops iterating as soon as it finds the element).
	+ Returns an index, which can be useful in some cases (e.g., accessing an element by index).
* Cons:
	+ May return `-1` if the element is not found, which may not always be what you want.
* **Array.includes()**: Pros:
	+ Simple and easy to read.
	+ Returns a boolean value (`true` or `false`) directly.
* Cons:
	+ May not be as efficient for large arrays due to the overhead of the `includes()` method.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, no external library is used. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript engines (e.g., V8) have implemented native support for `Array.includes()`, which can make it faster and more efficient compared to the other approaches.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None are mentioned in this specific benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some modern JavaScript features like arrow functions, template literals, or async/await may be used in the script preparation code or individual test cases.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to these approaches, consider:

* Using a library like Lodash (which provides `some`, `filter`, and `includes` functions) or Ramda (which provides similar functions with more functional programming-inspired syntax).
* Implementing your own custom array methods using loops or recursion.
* Using a different data structure, such as a Set or Map, which can provide faster lookups.

Keep in mind that the best approach depends on the specific use case and performance requirements.

Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf vs. includes Fork (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `Array.some vs Array.filter vs Array.indexOf vs Array.includes`

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Array.some

Array.filter

Array.indexOf

Array.includes

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Some vs. Filter vs. indexOf vs. includes Fork (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: Array.some vs Array.filter vs Array.indexOf vs Array.includes

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Array.some

Array.filter

Array.indexOf

Array.includes

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Array.some vs Array.filter vs Array.indexOf vs Array.includes`