Benchmark: Naive some vs using pop shortening

Script Preparation code:

var watched = [];
var ignored = [];

for(let i = 0; i < 100000; i++){watched.push({programId:Math.random()});}
for(let i = 0; i < 100000; i++){ignored.push({programId:Math.random()});}

Tests:

naive compare
watched.filter(obj => { return !ignored.some(item => item.programId === obj.programId); });
compare with pop
watched.filter(wObj => !ignored.some((iObj, ndx) => { if (iObj.programId === wObj.programId) { ignored[ndx] = ignored.pop(); return true; } return false; }) );

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
naive compare
compare with pop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/125.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/125.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 125 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
naive compare	0.1 Ops/sec
compare with pop	0.1 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into explaining the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: filtering an array using the `some()` method and filtering an array by using the `pop()` method on the `ignored` array while iterating over the `watched` array. The goal is to measure which approach is more efficient in terms of execution time.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition includes:

*   **Script Preparation Code**: This code generates two arrays, `watched` and `ignored`, containing random program IDs. It uses a loop to populate these arrays with 100,000 elements each.
*   **Html Preparation Code**: This field is empty, indicating that no HTML preparation is required for this benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1.  **Naive Compare**
    *   **Benchmark Definition**: The `filter()` method is used to remove elements from the `watched` array if they exist in the `ignored` array.
    *   **Test Name**: "naive compare"
2.  **Compare with Pop**
    *   **Benchmark Definition**: A custom filtering function uses the `pop()` method on the `ignored` array while iterating over the `watched` array to remove matching elements.

**Library Used**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's likely that JavaScript's built-in `filter()` and `some()` methods are being used along with the `push()` and `pop()` methods on arrays.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1.  **Naive Compare (Filter())**
    *   Pros:
        *   Easy to understand and implement.
        *   No additional data structure manipulation is required.
    *   Cons:
        *   Iterating over the entire array can be inefficient for large datasets.
        *   Performance may degrade as the size of the `ignored` array increases.
2.  **Compare with Pop**
    *   Pros:
        *   More efficient than naive compare, especially when dealing with large arrays or frequently growing `ignored` arrays.
        *   Avoids iterating over the entire `watched` array in each iteration.
    *   Cons:
        *   Requires an additional data structure (the `ignored` array) to keep track of removed elements.
        *   More complex implementation.

**Considerations**

*   When dealing with large datasets, using a custom filtering function that involves `pop()` may be more efficient than naive compare. However, this comes at the cost of increased memory usage due to the `ignored` array.
*   The performance difference between these approaches may not be significant for small arrays but can become substantial as the size of the input data grows.

**Alternatives**

If you need to filter arrays in JavaScript, other approaches include:

*   Using a `Set` data structure: If you're looking for fast membership testing and removing duplicates from an array.
*   Utilizing `every()` or `some()` with a callback function that returns a boolean value instead of using the `pop()` method.
*   Employing libraries like Lodash, which provides optimized filtering functions.

Keep in mind that the most efficient approach depends on your specific use case and performance requirements.

Related benchmarks:

Naive some vs using pop shortening (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: naive compare vs compare with pop

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

naive compare

compare with pop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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