Benchmark: set.has vs. Object key lookup vs array.includes

Script Preparation code:

var a = new Set([1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]);
var b = {1: true, 2: true, 3: true, 4: true, 5: true, 6: true, 7: true, 8: true, 9: true, 10: true}
var c = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10];

Tests:

set.has
return a.has(9)
key lookup
return b['9']
array.includes
return c.includes(10);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
set.has
key lookup
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 JSON data and explain what is being tested, compared, and considered.

**Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different approaches to access elements in a data structure:

1. `Set.has`: Using the `has` method on a `Set` object.
2. `Object key lookup`: Looking up an element by its key using square bracket notation (`[key]`) on an object.
3. `Array.includes`: Checking if an element exists in an array using the `includes` method.

**Options Compared**

The three options are compared in terms of their execution speed, measured in executions per second (EPS).

* **Set.has**: The `has` method is used to check if a value exists in the set. This approach is likely to be faster since sets are optimized for fast lookups.
* **Object key lookup**: This approach uses square bracket notation (`[key]`) to access an element by its key. This can lead to slower performance since it involves a lookup and possibly a creation of a new object reference.
* **Array.includes**: The `includes` method is used to check if an element exists in the array. This approach may be faster than using square bracket notation, but its performance can vary depending on the specific implementation.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Set.has**: Pros:
	+ Fast lookups
	+ Optimized for sets
	+ Simple syntax
Cons:
	+ May not work correctly with non-integer values or objects
* **Object key lookup**: Pros:
	+ Works with any data type that can be used as a key
	+ Flexibility
Cons:
	+ Slower performance compared to `Set.has`
	+ Requires square bracket notation, which may lead to additional memory allocations.
* **Array.includes**: Pros:
	+ Works with arrays of integers or strings
	+ May be faster than object key lookup for certain use cases
Cons:
	+ May be slower than `Set.has` for large sets
	+ Can lead to additional memory allocations if the array is not properly optimized.

**Library and Purpose**

In the provided benchmark, no external libraries are used. However, sets are a built-in JavaScript data structure that provides an efficient way to store unique values and perform lookups.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None of the test cases use special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what is commonly used in everyday development.

Related benchmarks:

set.has vs. Object key lookup vs array.includes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: set.has vs key lookup vs array.includes

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

set.has

key lookup

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):