Benchmark: Includes vs indexOf coucou

Tests:

includes
const array = ["hello", "how", "are", "you", "zhat's","up","dude"]; const res = array.includes("you");
indexOf
const array = ["hello", "how", "are", "you", "zhat's","up","dude"]; const res = array.indexOf("you") !== -1;

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:

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.

**Benchmark Explanation**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches: `includes` and `indexOf`. Both methods are used to check if a specific string exists in an array.

**Options Compared**

The two options compared in this benchmark are:

1. **`includes()`**: This method returns a boolean value (`true` or `false`) indicating whether the specified element is present in the array.
2. **`indexOf()`**: This method returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified element in the array, or `-1` if it's not found.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **`includes()`**:
    *   Pros: Simple to use, efficient, and widely supported.
    *   Cons: Can be slower than `indexOf()` for large arrays because it has to check all elements in the array.
*   **`indexOf()`**:
    *   Pros: Faster than `includes()`, especially for larger arrays, since it can stop searching as soon as it finds a match.
    *   Cons: Returns an index value instead of a boolean value, which might be less intuitive to some developers.

**Other Considerations**

*   **Null or undefined values**: In the provided benchmark definition, the array contains null or undefined values. This could affect the performance and results of both `includes()` and `indexOf()`. Depending on the browser and JavaScript engine used, one method may perform better than the other in such cases.
*   **Array length**: The array size in the benchmark definition is relatively small (10 elements). For larger arrays, the difference between `includes()` and `indexOf()` might be more pronounced.

**Library Usage**

None of the test cases explicitly uses any JavaScript libraries or frameworks. However, it's worth noting that some browsers or JavaScript engines may provide additional features or optimizations for certain methods, such as the `includes()` method in Internet Explorer 11 or Edge.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require specific knowledge or explanation.

**Alternatives**

If you want to compare the performance of other string searching methods, you could consider using:

*   **`Array.prototype.includes()` with a custom iterator**: This approach uses an iterator to search for the specified element in the array, which can be more efficient than the built-in `includes()` method.
*   **`String.prototype.indexOf()`**: Similar to `indexOf()`, but applied to strings instead of arrays.

Related benchmarks:

Includes vs indexOf coucou (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: includes vs indexOf

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

includes

indexOf

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):