Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
array.includes vs set.has for small n
(version: 0)
array.includes vs set.has for small n
Comparing performance of:
array includes vs set has
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var a = [1, 2, 3]; var b = new Set(a)
Tests:
array includes
return a.includes(3)
set has
return b.has(9)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
array includes
set has
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested. **What's being tested:** The benchmark is comparing the performance of two approaches: 1. `array.includes` (test case 1) 2. `set.has` (test case 2) Both tests are designed to check if a specific value (`3` in the first test and `9` in the second test) exists within an array or set, respectively. **Approaches:** ### array.includes `array.includes` is a method that searches for the existence of a specified value in an array. It iterates through the elements of the array until it finds the matching value (or reaches the end if not found). If the value exists, `includes` returns `true`, otherwise, it returns `false`. **Pros:** * Easy to understand and implement * Works with arrays of any data type **Cons:** * Iterates through the entire array for each element check, making it slower than other approaches for large datasets. ### set.has `set.has` is a method that checks if a specific value exists within a set. Sets are collections of unique values, so this operation is typically faster than searching an array since sets eliminate duplicates and have a more efficient data structure. **Pros:** * Fast lookup times due to the set's data structure * Eliminates duplicate values, reducing the size of the search space **Cons:** * May not work with all types of data (e.g., arrays of mixed data types) * Creates an additional object when creating a new set. **Library and purpose:** In this benchmark, `Set` is used as the underlying data structure for `set.has`. The `Set` library provides an efficient way to create and manipulate sets in JavaScript. **Special JS feature or syntax:** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. It's a straightforward comparison of two methods. **Other alternatives:** * For arrays, other alternatives could be: + `indexOf()`: Similar to `includes`, but returns the index of the first occurrence instead of just a boolean value. + `some()` and `every()`: These methods also iterate through the elements of an array, but with different conditions. `some()` returns `true` if at least one element matches the condition, while `every()` returns `true` only if all elements match the condition. * For sets, other alternatives could be: + Using a custom data structure like a hash table or a trie for fast lookup. **Benchmarking considerations:** * When testing these methods, it's essential to consider the size of the array or set being tested. The larger the dataset, the more significant the difference between `includes` and `has`. * Additionally, the specific use case and requirements should be taken into account when designing benchmarks. For example, if you're searching for a specific value in an array, you might want to prioritize speed over memory usage. In conclusion, this benchmark provides a straightforward comparison of two methods: `array.includes` and `set.has`. By understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, developers can make informed decisions about which method to use in their own projects.
Related benchmarks:
convert to set + set.has vs. array.includes
Includes (array) vs Has (Set)
array.includes vs set.has for small-ish n
Small n set vs array
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?