Benchmark: Simple Array Find vs Includes

Tests:

Performance Array Find
['Rafael', 'Otavio', 'Vitoria', 'Marcelo', 'Giovanna', 'Roberto', 'Fernanda', 'José', 'Joseph', 'Pedrinho', 'Lindinha', 'Irineu', 'Valdir', 'Holanda'].find((item) => item === 'Holanda')
Performance Array Includes
['Rafael', 'Otavio', 'Vitoria', 'Marcelo', 'Giovanna', 'Roberto', 'Fernanda', 'José', 'Joseph', 'Pedrinho', 'Lindinha', 'Irineu', 'Valdir', 'Holanda'].includes('Holanda')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Performance Array Find
Performance 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 benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Benchmark Definition` represents the test case itself. In this case, there are two test cases:

1. "Performance Array Find"
2. "Performance Array Includes"

Both test cases use an array of strings (`['Rafael', 'Otavio', 'Vitoria', ...]`) and search for a specific element using the `find()` or `includes()` methods.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, two options are being compared:

1. `find()`: This method returns the first element that satisfies the provided condition (in this case, `'Holanda'`). If no element matches, it returns `undefined`.
2. `includes()`: This method checks if a specific value exists in the array and returns a boolean result (`true` or `false`).

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **`find()`**:
	* Pros: More concise and expressive way to find a single element that matches the condition.
	* Cons: May be slower than `includes()` because it needs to iterate through the array until it finds the match.
2. **`includes()`**:
	* Pros: Faster and more efficient, especially for larger arrays, since it uses a linear search algorithm under the hood.
	* Cons: Less concise and more verbose than `find()`, as you need to specify the value to search for.

**Library Used**

In both test cases, no specific library is being used. The `Array.prototype.find()` and `Array.prototype.includes()` methods are part of the JavaScript standard library.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being used in these test cases beyond what's already mentioned (i.e., `find()` and `includes()`).

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to implement a custom solution, some alternative approaches could be:

* Using a traditional linear search algorithm, iterating through the array manually.
* Using a binary search algorithm, which is more efficient for large arrays but has higher overhead due to its complexity.

However, in this benchmark, `find()` and `includes()` are already optimized by JavaScript's standard library, making them suitable choices for performance comparison.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided JSON doesn't include any script preparation code. It seems that the test cases are self-contained and don't require any additional setup or initialization.

Overall, this benchmark provides a simple and straightforward way to compare the performance of `find()` and `includes()` methods in JavaScript, helping developers understand which approach is more suitable for specific use cases.

Related benchmarks:

Simple Array Find vs Includes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Performance Array Find vs Performance Array Includes

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Performance Array Find

Performance 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):