Benchmark: array find vs some

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.core.js"></script>

Tests:

array find
var a = ['hello', 'a', 'bc']; var b = a.find(item => item === 'bc');
array some
var a = ['hello', 'a', 'bc']; var b = a.some(item => item === 'bc');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array find
array some

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 13 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/18.1.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 18 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
array find	100008128.0 Ops/sec
array some	91037976.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Overview**

The test is designed to compare the performance of two different approaches for finding an item in an array: the `find()` method (new ES6 spread operator) and the `some()` method. The benchmark aims to determine which approach is faster for this specific use case.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Array Find using `find()`**: This approach uses the `find()` method, which returns the first element in the array that satisfies the provided condition.
2. **Array Some using `some()`**: This approach uses the `some()` method, which returns a boolean value indicating whether at least one element in the array satisfies the provided condition.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Array Find using `find()`**:
	* Pros: More expressive and concise code.
	* Cons: May return `undefined` if no matching element is found, which can lead to errors if not handled properly.
2. **Array Some using `some()`**:
	* Pros: Returns a boolean value, making it easier to handle the result in the calling code.
	* Cons: Requires an explicit loop or callback function to iterate over the array.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, the `lodash` library is used. The script preparation code includes a link to load the `lodash.core.js` file, which provides the `find()` and `some()` methods for arrays. `Lodash` is a popular utility library that offers a wide range of functional programming helpers.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The test cases use JavaScript features like arrow functions (`=>`) and template literals (`\r\n`) to define the array and its elements. These are considered standard features in modern JavaScript, but they might not be familiar to all developers.

**Other Considerations**

1. **Array size**: The benchmark assumes that the input array has a relatively small size. For larger arrays, the performance differences between `find()` and `some()` may become more pronounced.
2. **Browser support**: The test is executed in Google Chrome (version 129), which might not be representative of other browsers' performance.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, consider:

1. Using a custom loop or recursive function to iterate over the array.
2. Employing a library like `Underscore.js` instead of `Lodash`.
3. Implementing your own optimized algorithm for finding an item in an array.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not provide performance benefits comparable to the benchmark's results, especially with modern JavaScript engines and libraries like Lodash.

Related benchmarks:

array find vs some (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: array find vs array some

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array find

array some

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):