Benchmark: setHas vs. objectKeysArrayIncludes

Script Preparation code:

var a = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd'];
var c = {a: 'a', b: 'b', c: 'c', d: 'd'}
var b = new Set(a)

Tests:

includes
return Object.keys(c).includes('c')
lookup
return b.has('c')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
includes
lookup

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'll break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The test case measures the performance difference between two approaches: using `Object.keys(c).includes('c')` and `b.has('c')`.

**Approaches Compared**

1. **`Object.keys(c).includes('c')`**
	* Purpose: Checks if a key (`'c'`) exists in an object (`c`) by iterating over the object's keys using `Object.keys()`.
	* Pros:
		+ Easy to understand and implement.
		+ Works for any object, regardless of its structure or properties.
	* Cons:
		+ Iterates over all keys, which can be slow for large objects.
		+ May not be the most efficient way to check if a key exists.
2. **`b.has('c')`**
	* Purpose: Checks if a key (`'c'`) exists in a Set (`b`) using its `has()` method.
	* Pros:
		+ Fast and efficient, as Sets are designed for fast lookups.
		+ Only iterates over the set's elements once.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires creating a Set from an array (as shown in the Script Preparation Code).
		+ May not work correctly if the key is not present in the initial array.

**Other Considerations**

The test case assumes that the `Set` object (`b`) has been created from an array of keys (`a`). The `includes()` method is used on an object (`c`) with a similar structure, but this might not be representative of real-world use cases.

**Library and Special JS Features**

In this benchmark, we're using:

* No external libraries.
* The `Set` object is a built-in JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).
* There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested.

**Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches could be considered:

1. Using a Map instead of an Object for fast lookups.
2. Using a library like Lodash's `includes()` function, which is optimized for performance.
3. Optimizing the iteration process using techniques like caching or memoization.

However, these alternatives would likely change the focus and scope of the benchmark, and might not be representative of typical use cases.

Related benchmarks:

setHas vs. objectKeysArrayIncludes (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: includes vs lookup

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

includes

lookup

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):