Benchmark: ifs compare 2 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var arr = Array.from(Array(100000).keys());
var mode = 'include';
var id = 50000;

Tests:

ifs
var is = (mode === 'exclude' && arr.includes(id)) || (mode === 'include' && arr.length > 0 && !arr.includes(id))
ternary
var is = arr.length ? (mode === 'exclude' ? arr.includes(id) : !arr.includes(id)) : false

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ifs
ternary

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its various components.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two different approaches for checking if an element exists in an array: a traditional `if` statement (`"ifs"`), and a ternary operator (`"ternary"`). The benchmark uses a predefined script preparation code, which creates an array of 100,000 elements (using the `Array.from()` method) and sets two variables: `mode` to `'include'` or `'exclude'`, and `id` to 50,000.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is:
```javascript
var arr = Array.from(Array(100000).keys()); // create an array of 100,000 elements
var mode = 'include'; // set the mode to 'include'
var id = 50000; // set the id to 50,000
```
This code creates a large array of integers from 0 to 99,999 using `Array.from()` and two other methods.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two individual test cases:

1. **"ifs"`**: This test case uses the traditional `if` statement approach:
```javascript
var is = (mode === 'exclude' && arr.includes(id)) || (mode === 'include' && arr.length > 0 && !arr.includes(id));
```
This code checks if the element with `id` exists in the array using `includes()`, depending on the value of `mode`. If `mode` is `'exclude'`, it simply checks for existence; otherwise, it also checks if the array has any elements other than the one with `id`.

2. **"ternary"`**: This test case uses the ternary operator approach:
```javascript
var is = arr.length ? (mode === 'exclude' ? arr.includes(id) : !arr.includes(id)) : false;
```
This code checks if the array has any elements using its length. If it does, it then uses a ternary operator to check for existence of the element with `id`, depending on the value of `mode`.

**Pros and Cons**

* **"ifs"` approach:
	+ Pros: Simple, easy to understand, and suitable for small arrays.
	+ Cons: Can be slower due to the use of `includes()` method, which has a linear search time complexity (O(n)).
* **"ternary"` approach:
	+ Pros: Can be faster for large arrays since it avoids using `includes()`, but may require more modern JavaScript engines that support ternary operator expressions.
	+ Cons: May not work correctly if the array is empty, as the expression relies on its length being truthy.

**Library**

There are no external libraries used in this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The benchmark uses a few modern JavaScript features:

* `Array.from()` method (ECMAScript 2015 feature)
* Ternary operator expressions (ECMAScript 2015 feature)

These features require compatible JavaScript engines, such as those used by Chrome.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for checking if an element exists in an array could be:

* Using a `Set` data structure to store the elements and then checking membership
* Using a linear search algorithm with bounds checking (e.g., `binarySearch()` or `lowerBound()`)
* Using a specialized library like Lodash's `includes()` function

However, these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and trade-offs compared to the "ifs" and ternary approaches used in this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

ifs compare 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ifs vs ternary

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ifs

ternary

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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