Benchmark: set.has vs. Object key lookup fork2

Script Preparation code:

var a = ['f', 's', 't', 'fo', 'fi', 'si', 'se', 'e', 'n', 'ten'];
var b = {'f': true, 's': true, 't': true, 'fo': true, 'fi': true, 'si': true, 'se': true, 'e': true, 'n': true, 'ten': true}

Tests:

includes
return a.includes('se')
key lookup
return b['se']

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
includes
key 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.

Let's break down the benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two different approaches to search for a specific value within an array:

1. `set.has vs. Object key lookup fork2`

This benchmark tests the performance of two methods:

a. Using `includes()` method on an array (`set.has`)

b. Directly accessing a property on an object using the square bracket notation (`Object key lookup`)

**Options Compared:**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Array Inclusion Method (set.has)**

This approach uses the `includes()` method, which returns `true` if an element with the specified value is found in the array.

2. **Direct Object Property Access (key lookup)**

This approach directly accesses a property on the object using the square bracket notation (`b['se']`). This is equivalent to using the dot notation (`b.se`) or the bracket notation (`Object.hasOwn(b, 'se')`).

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **Array Inclusion Method (set.has)**

Pros:

* More concise and readable
* Can be used with arrays of any type

Cons:

* May not be optimized for performance in all browsers or versions
* May incur additional overhead due to the method's implementation

2. **Direct Object Property Access (key lookup)**

Pros:

* Typically faster and more efficient, especially for large objects
* Can be used with objects of any structure

Cons:

* Less readable and less concise than the array inclusion method
* Requires direct access to the property, which can lead to errors if the property is missing or not defined.

**Library Used:**

The benchmark uses the `includes()` method, which is a built-in JavaScript method introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). This method provides an efficient way to search for a specific value within an array. The benchmark also uses objects with nested properties, but no libraries are explicitly mentioned.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**

The benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax, such as `async/await`, `let` or `const`, or ES6 classes. However, it does rely on modern JavaScript features like the `includes()` method and object property access.

**Alternative Approaches:**

Other alternatives for searching within an array could include:

* Using a custom loop to iterate through the array elements
* Utilizing the `indexOf()` method (introduced in ECMAScript 5) instead of `includes()`
* Implementing a binary search algorithm for large arrays

Keep in mind that these alternatives might have different performance characteristics and may not be as efficient as the `includes()` method.

**Benchmark Preparation Code:**

The provided script preparation code defines two variables:

1. `a`: an array with 11 elements, including duplicates
2. `b`: an object with properties matching some of the values in the array

These variables are used to create a test scenario for the benchmark, where the goal is to find a specific value within the array or access a property on the object.

**Test Cases:**

The individual test cases define two separate benchmarks:

1. `includes`: Tests the performance of searching for a specific value (`"se"`) within the array using the `includes()` method.
2. `key lookup`: Tests the performance of directly accessing a property (`"se"`) on the object using the square bracket notation.

These test cases are used to measure the performance difference between these two approaches, allowing users to compare and contrast their results.

Related benchmarks:

set.has vs. Object key lookup fork2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: includes vs key lookup

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

includes

key 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):