Benchmark: Array.includes() v.s || (ver.2 on multiple cases)

Script Preparation code:

var a = '123'
var b = '456'
var c = '789'
var d = '999'
var e = '999'

Tests:

Array.includes()
[a,b,c,d].includes(e)
||
a===e||b===e||c===e||d===e

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and what are the pros and cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Definition**

The test aims to compare two methods for determining whether a variable is equal to any of possible cases:

1. **Array.includes()**: This method checks if a value exists in an array.
2. **|| (ver.2 on multiple cases)**: This is a shorthand way of writing multiple `===` comparisons.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script sets up five variables: `a`, `b`, `c`, `d`, and `e`. These values are used to create an array `[a, b, c, d]` and check if the variable `e` is included in this array using both methods.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that only JavaScript is being executed for this benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

The test consists of two individual cases:

1. **Array.includes()**: This case checks if `e` (which equals `'999'`) is included in the array `[a, b, c, d]` using `Array.includes(e)`.
2. **||**: This case checks if `e` is equal to any of the values `a`, `b`, `c`, or `d` using a series of `===` comparisons: `a === e || b === e || c === e || d === e`.

**Pros and Cons**

**Array.includes()**:

Pros:

* More concise and readable code
* Easier to extend cases (e.g., add more elements to the array)
* Built-in function, so it's likely to be optimized for performance

Cons:

* May not be as fast as a simple `===` comparison in some cases
* Requires an array to search through

**|| (ver.2 on multiple cases)**:

Pros:

* Can be faster than `Array.includes()` for small arrays or specific use cases
* More control over the comparisons performed

Cons:

* Less readable and more verbose code
* Harder to extend cases (e.g., add more elements to the array)
* Requires manual handling of edge cases (e.g., null or undefined values)

**Library: None**

There is no library being used in this benchmark.

**Special JS feature or syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to implement a custom version of the `||` method, you could use a loop that iterates over each element in the array and checks if it's equal to `e`. Here's an example:
```javascript
function custom_or(arr, val) {
  for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
    if (arr[i] === val) return true;
  }
  return false;
}

// Usage
console.log(custom_or([a, b, c, d], e)); // Output: true or false
```
Note that this implementation is less efficient and more verbose than the original `||` method.

The benchmark on MeasureThat.net provides valuable insights into the performance differences between these two methods. By running multiple executions per second, the test gives a realistic representation of how these methods would perform in real-world scenarios.

Related benchmarks:

Array.includes() v.s || (ver.2 on multiple cases) (version: 2)

"Array includes" v.s "||" To find out is a variable is equal to any of possible cases. Array.includes() is faster and easier to extend cases.

Comparing performance of: Array.includes() vs ||

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Array.includes()

||

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):