Benchmark: Array IndexOf vs includes

Script Preparation code:

var array1 = [0,1,3,532,32,3576,745,1235,6432,31265,654,43212,354,4667,875,999,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991,9991]

Tests:

Includes
array1.indexOf(31265) > -1
IndexOf
array1.includes(31265)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Includes
IndexOf

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/142.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 142 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Includes	68798944.0 Ops/sec
IndexOf	71251960.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark compares the performance of two methods to check if an element exists in an array: `indexOf` and `includes`.

**What is being tested?**

Two individual test cases are defined:

1. **Includes**: Verifies if `array1.includes(31265)` returns a boolean value indicating whether 31265 is present in the array.
2. **IndexOf**: Verifies if `array1.indexOf(31265)` returns an index value (or -1 if not found) indicating the position of 31265 in the array.

**Options compared**

The two methods are compared in terms of their execution time, with the goal of identifying which one is faster for this specific use case.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

* **`includes` method**
	+ Pros:
		- More readable and concise code.
		- Less prone to off-by-one errors or edge cases.
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower than `indexOf` due to the overhead of string comparison.
* **`indexOf` method**
	+ Pros:
		- Can return an index value, which might be useful in certain situations.
	+ Cons:
		- More verbose code.
		- Prone to off-by-one errors or edge cases if not used carefully.

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, `array1` is a JavaScript array created using the default `var` syntax, which is a part of the ECMAScript standard.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

The test does not explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanation. Both methods are widely supported and should work in most modern browsers.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to implement this benchmark yourself, you could create an array `array1` with a large number of elements and then measure the execution time of both `includes` and `indexOf` methods using a timer or profiling tool. You would also need to consider any platform-specific differences in behavior or performance.

In JavaScript, alternative approaches for similar use cases might include:

* Using `includes()` method on other data structures like strings or sets.
* Implementing custom search algorithms for arrays or other data structures.
* Using optimized libraries or frameworks that provide faster array searching mechanisms.

Related benchmarks:

Array IndexOf vs includes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Includes vs IndexOf

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Includes

IndexOf

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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