Benchmark: includes vs in - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var a = [ 'a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'ee', 'aa', 'cc', 'ab', 'zy', 'ac'];
var b = { 'a': {}, 'b': {}, 'c': {}, 'd': {}, 'ee': {}, 'aa': {}, 'cc': {}, 'ab': {}, 'zy': {}, 'ac': {} };

Tests:

includes
return a.includes('zy')
in
return 'zy' in b

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
includes
in

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.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and provide insights into the different approaches.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two test cases, each measuring the performance of `includes` vs `in` operators in JavaScript. Specifically, it tests how these operators compare the existence of a string within an array (`a`) or an object (`b`). The tests are designed to determine which approach is faster.

**Options compared:**

There are two options being compared:

1. **`includes()` method**: This method checks if a specified value (in this case, `"zy"`) exists in the array (`a`).
2. **`in` operator**: This operator checks if a property (in this case, `"zy"`) exists in an object (`b`).

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **`includes()` method**:
	* Pros:
		+ More intuitive and readable syntax.
		+ Fewer potential pitfalls compared to the `in` operator.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower for large arrays due to the need to iterate over elements.
2. **`in` operator**:
	* Pros:
		+ Often faster for large objects, as it can use an optimized lookup algorithm.
		+ Can be more efficient for objects with many properties.
	* Cons:
		+ Less intuitive and less readable syntax compared to the `includes()` method.

**Library and purpose:**

In this benchmark, there are no external libraries used. However, some built-in JavaScript features like the `Array.prototype.includes()` and the `in` operator are being tested.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being highlighted in this benchmark. The focus is solely on comparing the performance of two basic operators (`includes()` and `in`).

Related benchmarks:

includes vs in (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: includes vs in

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

includes

in

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):