Benchmark: set.has vs. array.includes including misses

Script Preparation code:

var a = ['AbortError', 'OhNoesError'];
var b = new Set(a)

Tests:

includes
return a.includes('AbortError')
lookup
return b.has('AbortError')
Miss
return a.includes('HelloWorldError')
miss set
return b.has('HelloWorldError')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
includes
lookup
Miss
miss set

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark tests the performance difference between two approaches to check if an element exists in a Set or an array:

1. `Set.has()` vs. `array.includes()`
2. Missing elements (`"Miss"`) for both `Set.has()` and `array.includes()` (i.e., checking if an element is not present)

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **`Set.has()`**: A method on the Set data structure to check if a value exists in the set.
2. **`array.includes()`**: A method on arrays to check if a value exists in the array.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **`Set.has()`**:
	+ Pros:
		- Generally faster than `array.includes()`, especially for large sets.
		- More concise code, as it eliminates the need to check if the element is not present.
	+ Cons:
		- Not available in older browsers (e.g., IE).
		- May have performance overhead due to caching or hashing.
* **`array.includes()`**:
	+ Pros:
		- Widely supported across modern browsers and JavaScript engines.
		- Can be used with arrays of any type, not just primitive values.
	+ Cons:
		- Generally slower than `Set.has()` for large sets.
		- May have performance overhead due to iterating over the array.

**Special Consideration: "Miss" Test Case**

The "Miss" test case checks if an element is not present in the set or array. This is done by calling `Set.has()` with a value that is not expected to exist, which will return false. Similarly, `array.includes()` is called with a value that is known to be non-existent.

**Library Used: None**

The benchmark does not use any external libraries or dependencies, making it suitable for testing the built-in JavaScript features.

**Special Consideration: JavaScript Features (None)**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being used in this benchmark. The tests only utilize standard JavaScript methods and data structures.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to checking if an element exists in a Set or array, consider the following:

1. **`Map.has()`**: Similar to `Set.has()`, but for Map data structures.
2. **`array.indexOf()`**: Returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value in the array. If not found, returns -1.
3. **Custom implementation**: You could implement a custom function using JavaScript's built-in methods, such as iterating over the set or array and checking for existence manually.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have varying performance characteristics compared to `Set.has()` and `array.includes()`.

Related benchmarks:

set.has vs. array.includes including misses (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: includes vs lookup vs Miss vs miss set

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

includes

lookup

Miss

miss set

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):