Benchmark: for vs Array.find

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [...Array(10000).keys()];

Tests:

Array.find
var b = arr.find(item => item === 5555);
Native for loop
for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) { if (arr[i] === 5555) { return; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.find
Native for loop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; arm_64; Android 11; Redmi Note 9S) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.6834.2144 YaApp_Android/25.20.1 YaSearchBrowser/25.20.1 BroPP/1.0 SA/3 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 132 on Android 25.20.1

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.find	32715.9 Ops/sec
Native for loop	31196.8 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 benchmark and its test cases.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two test cases that compare the performance of native JavaScript for loops versus `Array.find` (a built-in array method introduced in ECMAScript 2015).

In essence, these tests measure how fast each approach can find a specific element within an array. The first test case uses a native for loop to iterate through the array and find the desired value. The second test case uses the `Array.find` method with a callback function to achieve the same result.

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Native JavaScript for loop**: A traditional loop that manually iterates through each element of the array using an index (`i`) and checks if the current element matches the target value.
2. **Array.find method**: A built-in array method that takes a callback function as an argument, allowing you to specify a condition that must be met for each element in the array.

**Pros and cons of each approach**

**Native JavaScript for loop:**

Pros:

* More control over iteration (e.g., skipping elements or iterating backwards).
* No reliance on built-in methods that might introduce overhead.
* Can be optimized further with techniques like caching or tail recursion.

Cons:

* More verbose code, especially for large arrays or complex conditions.
* Error-prone if not implemented correctly (e.g., index out-of-bounds issues).

**Array.find method:**

Pros:

* Concise and readable code.
* Eliminates the need to manually iterate through each element.
* Less error-prone compared to traditional loops.

Cons:

* Introduces additional overhead due to the built-in method call and potential implementation optimizations.
* May not perform as well for very large arrays or complex conditions.

**Library usage**

There are no explicit libraries mentioned in the provided code. However, it's worth noting that `Array.find` is a standard method introduced in ECMAScript 2015, which means all modern JavaScript engines (including those used by browsers like Chrome) support it out-of-the-box.

**Special JS features or syntax**

The benchmark uses:

1. **Template literals**: The "var b = arr.find(item => item === 5555);" line uses a template literal to define the callback function for `Array.find`. This feature was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 as well.
2. **Arrow functions**: The same line also uses an arrow function (`item => item === 5555`) instead of a traditional function declaration. While not unique to this benchmark, it's worth noting that arrow functions are a common pattern in modern JavaScript.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for finding a specific element within an array could include:

1. **Using `some()` method**: Instead of `find()`, you can use the `some()` method with a callback function to find the first element that meets the condition.
2. **Manual iteration using `indexOf()`**: You can manually iterate through each element in the array using the `indexOf()` method, which returns the index of the first occurrence of the target value.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and trade-offs compared to the native for loop and `Array.find` methods.

Related benchmarks:

for vs Array.find (version: 0)

Native JS for loop vs Array.find

Comparing performance of: Array.find vs Native for loop

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.find

Native for loop

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):