Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Test intersecc
(version: 0)
Test intersecc
Comparing performance of:
some vs includes
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.8.3/underscore-min.js'></script>
Tests:
some
const array1 = [1,5,9,2,15,24]; const array2 = [5,12,333,21,1,89,28,15,3,1,39,28,111,8920,99,18,84,77,6725]; const interset = (array1, array2) => _.some(array1, (item1) => _.some(array2, (item2) => item1 === item2));
includes
const array1 = [1,5,9,2,15,24]; const array2 = [5,12,333,21,1,89,28,15,3,1,39,28,111,8920,99,18,84,77,6725]; const interset = (array1, array2) => _.some(array1, (item1) => array2.includes(item1));
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
some
includes
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. **Benchmark Overview** The test is comparing two approaches to check if an array exists in another array: `some` and `includes`. The goal is to measure which approach is faster. **Options Compared** 1. **_some()`**: This method returns `true` as soon as it finds at least one element in the first array that satisfies the provided condition. If no elements satisfy the condition, it returns `false`. 2. **Array.prototype.includes()**: This method checks if an array contains a specified value. It iterates through the array and returns `true` if the value is found, or `false` otherwise. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **_some()`**: * Pros: More efficient for large arrays since it stops iterating as soon as it finds a match. * Cons: May be slower for small arrays due to the overhead of creating a closure. 2. **Array.prototype.includes()**: * Pros: Simpler implementation, widely supported, and often faster for small arrays. * Cons: Less efficient for large arrays since it iterates through the entire array. **Library Used** The `underscore.js` library is used in the benchmark definition. It provides a `some()` method that can be used to check if any elements in an array satisfy a condition. The purpose of using this library is likely to provide a consistent and efficient way to implement the `_some()`` approach across different browsers. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** None are mentioned, as the code does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would affect its behavior. **Other Considerations** * The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of these two approaches in a head-to-head comparison. * The results are likely used to inform decisions about which approach should be used in production code. **Alternatives** If you need to check if an array exists in another array, other alternatives include: 1. Using `filter()` and checking for an empty result: `array2.filter(item => item === itemInArray).length > 0` 2. Using `indexOf()` or `lastIndexOf()`: `array2.indexOf(itemInArray) !== -1` or `array2.lastIndexOf(itemInArray) !== -1` 3. Implementing a custom loop to iterate through the array However, it's worth noting that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics compared to the `_some()`` and `includes()` methods used in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
Object comparison
cdfersd
_.isArray vs Array.isArray
Equals vs underscore vs lodash
Equals vs underscore vs lodash part 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?