Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
set vs some 1000000
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Set vs Some
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
window.arr = Array.from({ length: 1000000 }, (_, i) => i);
Tests:
Set
const set = new Set(window.arr); set.has(900000);
Some
window.arr.some(w => w === 900000)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Set
Some
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):
I'll break down the provided JSON for the MeasureThat.net benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Definition:** The benchmark definition consists of two parts: 1. **Script Preparation Code:** This code creates an array `window.arr` with 1 million elements using `Array.from()`. The intention is to create a large dataset for testing. 2. **Html Preparation Code:** This field is empty, indicating that no additional HTML preparation is required. **Individual Test Cases:** There are two test cases: ### Set The "Set" test case uses the built-in JavaScript `Set` object to check if an element (900000) exists in a set created from the `window.arr` array. The purpose of this test is likely to measure the performance of checking for existence using a `Set`. Pros and Cons: * **Pros:** Sets are generally faster than arrays for membership testing because they use a hash table data structure, which allows for O(1) lookup times. * **Cons:** Creating a set from an array can be slower due to the additional overhead of creating a new data structure. ### Some The "Some" test case uses the `some()` method on the `window.arr` array to check if at least one element (900000) matches a condition. The purpose of this test is likely to measure the performance of using `some()` for membership testing. Pros and Cons: * **Pros:** `some()` is generally faster than checking each element individually because it stops iterating as soon as it finds a match. * **Cons:** If no elements match, the entire array is iterated over, which can be slower for large arrays. **Library Used:** None. The tests use only built-in JavaScript features and libraries. **Special JS Features or Syntax:** The test cases do not explicitly require any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's built into the language. **Other Alternatives:** For benchmarking membership testing, other approaches could include: 1. Using a `Map` instead of a `Set`, which also has O(1) lookup times. 2. Implementing a custom hash table data structure for faster lookups. 3. Using a different algorithm, such as the Boyer-Moore algorithm or Knuth-Morris-Pratt algorithm. Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be relevant to the specific use case of testing membership testing using built-in JavaScript features like `Set` and `some()`.
Related benchmarks:
_.isEmpty vs Array.length new
arr.at(-1) vs arr[arr.length - 1]
set vs some
set has vs array includes (1k items)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?