Benchmark: set.has vs. array.includes - large array

Script Preparation code:

var a = [];
for(let i = 0; i < 1000; i++){a.push(i)}
var b = new Set(a)

Tests:

includes
return a.includes(499)
lookup
return b.has(499)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
includes
lookup

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 Json:**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches:

1. `set.has`: This method checks if an element exists in a Set data structure.
2. `array.includes`: This method checks if an element exists in an array using the `includes` method.

The benchmark creates a large array and converts it to a Set, then performs the lookups for both methods.

**Script Preparation Code:**

```javascript
var a = [];
for(let i = 0; i < 1000; i++){
    a.push(i);
}
var b = new Set(a);
```

This code creates an array `a` with 1000 elements and converts it to a Set `b`.

**Html Preparation Code:**

There is no HTML preparation code provided.

**Individual Test Cases:**

The benchmark consists of two test cases:

1. `includes`: This test case checks if the element `499` exists in the array using the `array.includes` method.
2. `lookup`: This test case checks if the element `499` exists in the Set using the `set.has` method.

**Pros and Cons:**

* `array.includes`:
	+ Pros: Fast, efficient, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: Can be slower for very large datasets due to the need to iterate through the array.
* `set.has`:
	+ Pros: Fast, efficient, and optimized for Set lookups.
	+ Cons: May not work as expected if the element is not a hashable value.

**Library and Purpose:**

The `Set` data structure is a built-in JavaScript object that provides an efficient way to store unique values. It uses a hash table internally, which allows for fast lookup operations.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives:**

If you want to compare the performance of `array.includes` with other approaches, you can consider using:

* `indexOf()`: This method searches for an element in an array and returns its index. It can be slower than `includes` due to the need to iterate through the array.
* `filter()`: This method creates a new array that includes only elements that pass a test. While it's not a direct alternative, it can be used to implement a lookup-like behavior.
* Native array methods like `findIndex()` or `some()`: These methods provide more efficient lookup options than `includes`, but may have different requirements and usage patterns.

Keep in mind that the performance of these alternatives will vary depending on the specific use case and dataset.

Related benchmarks:

set.has vs. array.includes - large array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: includes vs lookup

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

includes

lookup

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):