Benchmark: Find VS FindIndex and select item

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
var i = 0;

while (i <= 1E5) arr[i] = i++;

Tests:

findIndex
const index = arr.findIndex(item => item == 1E5); const item = arr[index]
find
const item = arr.find(item => item == 1E5);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
findIndex
find

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/125.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 125 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
findIndex	2451.0 Ops/sec
find	2285.7 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

The provided benchmark aims to measure the performance difference between two approaches: `findIndex` and `find`. Both methods are used to find an item in an array based on a specific condition.

**Benchmark Definition**

The JSON represents a single benchmark with two test cases:

1. **Find**: This test case uses the `find()` method to search for an element in the array. The condition is `item == 1E5`, which means the method will return the first occurrence of the number `1E5` (which is equal to 10000).
2. **FindIndex**: This test case uses the `findIndex()` method to find the index of the first element in the array that satisfies the condition `item == 1E5`. The result is then used to access the corresponding element using the index.

**Options Compared**

The two methods compared are:

*   `find()`: A method that returns an array value if it finds the specified element, otherwise - undefined.
*   `findIndex()`: A method that returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value or -1 if not found.

**Pros and Cons:**

*   **Find():**
    *   Pros:
        *   More concise code
        *   Can be used when you need to use the result of the search as a single value.
    *   Cons:
        *   May return undefined if no element is found, which can lead to runtime errors.
        *   Can be less efficient than `findIndex()` for large datasets.

*   **FindIndex():**
    *   Pros:
        *   Returns an index instead of a value, making it more suitable for arrays where you need to use the position of the element.
        *   More efficient for large datasets since it returns an integer index instead of searching for the entire array.
    *   Cons:
        *   Can be less readable due to the additional step required to access the element at the found index.

**Library/Function Used**

In both test cases, a JavaScript library function is used: `arr.find()` and `arr.findIndex()`. These functions are built-in methods in modern JavaScript that operate on arrays. The main difference between them lies in their behavior when no matching elements are found:

*   `find()` will return undefined if no element matches the condition.
*   `findIndex()` will return -1 if no element is found.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

No special features or syntax are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the use of `const` to declare variables and the arrow function syntax (`=>`) used in the conditions are part of modern JavaScript syntax and were introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Other Alternatives**

For larger datasets or more complex search operations, other methods like:

*   Using `Array.prototype.forEach()` with a callback function
*   Implementing custom binary search algorithms
*   Utilizing libraries that offer optimized search functions (e.g., Lodash)

might be considered.

Related benchmarks:

Find VS FindIndex and select item (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: findIndex vs find

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

findIndex

find

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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