Benchmark: startsWith vs includes (same search)q

Tests:

includes
const str = "https://firebase.com/this/is/a/long/thing" const cache = { "https://firebase.com/this/is/a/long/thing": true } cache["https://firebase.com/this/is/a/long/thing"]
startsWith
const str = "https://firebase.com/this/is/a/long/thing" str.startsWith("https://firebase")

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
includes
startsWith

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 benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark definition is essentially a JSON object that describes the test case. In this case, there are two test cases:

1. `includes`: This test case checks if the string `"https://firebase.com/this/is/a/long/thing"` can be found in a cache object using the `[key]` syntax.
2. `startsWith`: This test case checks if the string `"https://firebase.com/this/is/a/long/thing"` starts with another string using the `startsWith()` method.

**Options Compared:**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches:

1. **Using the `[key]` syntax**: This approach uses the bracket notation to access a property of an object by its key.
2. **Using the `startsWith()` method**: This approach uses the `startsWith()` method to check if a string starts with another string.

**Pros and Cons:**

* Using the `[key]` syntax:
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and readable code
		- Can be faster since it avoids the overhead of a function call
	+ Cons:
		- May not work in older browsers or environments that don't support bracket notation
		- Can lead to errors if the property name is not a string
* Using the `startsWith()` method:
	+ Pros:
		- Works in all modern browsers and environments
		- Is more explicit and readable code
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower since it involves a function call

**Library:**

There is no library explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that the `startsWith()` method is a built-in JavaScript method that was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Special JS Features/Syntax:**

* Bracket notation (`[]`) is not a special feature, but it's a common JavaScript syntax used to access object properties.
* The `startsWith()` method is a standard JavaScript method that was introduced in ES6.

**Other Alternatives:**

There are other alternatives to the `[key]` syntax and the `startsWith()` method, such as:

* Using the `.hasOwnProperty()` method to check if an object has a specific property
* Using the `.includes()` method to search for a string within an array or string
* Using regular expressions to perform string matching

However, these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and are not directly comparable to the `[key]` syntax and `startsWith()` method in this benchmark.

Overall, the benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: using the `[key]` syntax versus using the `startsWith()` method.

Related benchmarks:

startsWith vs includes (same search)q (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: includes vs startsWith

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

includes

startsWith

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):