Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lookup speeds
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lookup in vs includes vs lookup index
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
a = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f', 'g', 'h', 'i', 'j', 'k', 'l', 'm', 'n', 'o' ,'p'] b = {a:1, b:1, c:1, d:1, e:1 ,f:1 ,g:1 ,h:1 ,i:1 ,j:1 ,k:1 ,l:1 ,m:1 ,n:1 ,o:1 ,p:1}
Tests:
lookup in
return 'i' in b
includes
return 'i' in a
lookup index
return b['i']
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lookup in
includes
lookup index
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and its implications. **Benchmark Test Cases** The test cases measure the performance of three different approaches to check if a value exists in an array or object: 1. **`return 'i' in b`**: This test case checks if the string `'i'` is present as a key in the object `b`. The `in` operator returns a boolean indicating whether the value is found. 2. **`return 'i' in a`**: Similar to the previous test case, but it checks for the presence of the string `'i'` in the array `a`. 3. **`return b['i']`**: This test case directly accesses and returns the value associated with the key `'i'` in the object `b`. Note that this assumes a zero-based index. **Comparison and Pro/Cons** The three approaches are compared to determine which one is the fastest: * **`in` operator**: + Pros: Easy to read, concise syntax. + Cons: May have overhead due to string comparison or object lookup. * **Array indexing** (`b['i']`): + Pros: Direct access to values, potentially faster for arrays with a fixed size. + Cons: Requires knowing the index of the desired value (in this case, `'i'` is at index 10), and may not be suitable for dynamic or unsorted data. * **Contains method** (`includes`): + Pros: Similar to `in`, but may have better performance in some cases due to optimized implementation. + Cons: Less readable syntax compared to `in`. **Library Usage** None of the test cases explicitly use any external libraries. **Special JS Features or Syntax** No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these test cases. However, if we consider the use of the `includes` method, it's worth noting that this method is a part of the ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) standard and provides a more concise way to check for element presence in arrays. **Alternatives** Other alternatives to measure lookup speeds might include: * Using a hash table or object with arbitrary keys. * Comparing against an array's `indexOf` method, which returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value. * Measuring the performance of other methods like `findIndex`, `filter()`, or `every()`. To further improve the benchmark, you could consider adding more test cases that cover different edge cases, such as: * Checking for an empty array or object * Searching for a non-existent key * Using negative indices By including these additional scenarios, the results will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the lookup performance in JavaScript.
Related benchmarks:
concat vs spread funcking operator
find index in array performance
Ramda mapObjIndexed vs Ramda map
Double Lookup
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?