Benchmark: set.has vs. array.includesdd

Script Preparation code:

var a = Array.from({length: 2000}, (_, i) => i)
var b = new Set(a)

Tests:

includes
return a.includes(9)
lookup
return b.has(9)

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.

Let's break down the benchmark definition and test cases to understand what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark, specifically comparing two approaches for checking if an element exists in an array:

1. `array.includes`: checks if an element is present in the array using the `includes()` method.
2. `Set.has`: uses a `Set` data structure to keep track of unique elements and checks if an element exists by calling its `has()` method.

**Options being compared**

Two approaches are being tested:

1. **Array includes**: This option uses the built-in `includes()` method on the array, which searches for the specified value in the array.
2. **Set has**: This option uses a `Set` data structure to store unique elements and checks if an element exists by calling its `has()` method.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

1. **Array includes**:
	* Pros: Simple, efficient, and widely supported (all modern browsers).
	* Cons: May have slower performance for very large arrays or when searching for a specific value.
2. **Set has**:
	* Pros: Can be faster for certain use cases (e.g., searching for unique values in an array), and it provides additional benefits like deduplication.
	* Cons: Requires creating a `Set` object, which can add overhead, especially when dealing with large arrays.

**Library used**

The `Set` data structure is a built-in JavaScript library. Its purpose is to provide a data structure that keeps track of unique elements, allowing for efficient membership testing using the `has()` method.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

Before settling on these two approaches, you might consider:

1. **Array indexOf**: This option uses the `indexOf()` method to find the index of the specified value in the array. While it provides a way to retrieve the index, it's not as efficient as `includes()`.
2. **Regular expressions**: You could use regular expressions to search for the specified value in the array. However, this approach would likely be slower and more complex than using `includes()`.

Overall, the benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches for checking if an element exists in an array: a simple and widely supported method (`array.includes()`) versus a potentially faster but more specialized solution (`Set.has()`).

Related benchmarks:

set.has vs. array.includesdd (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: includes vs lookup

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

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):