Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
二百斤担子十里山路不换肩
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
includes vs some
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
window.arr = [0, 0, 0, 0, 200, 0, 0, 0, 0]
Tests:
includes
arr.includes(200)
some
arr.some(x => x === 200)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
includes
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):
**Overview of the Benchmark** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark compares the performance of two options: `arr.includes(200)` and `arr.some(x => x === 200)`. Both tests aim to find the index of the element `200` in an array `arr`. **Script Preparation Code** The script preparation code sets up an array `arr` with six elements: ```javascript window.arr = [0, 0, 0, 0, 200, 0, 0, 0, 0]; ``` This code is executed before running the benchmark tests. **Html Preparation Code** There is no HTML preparation code provided in this benchmark. **Test Cases** There are two test cases: 1. `includes`: Tests whether an element exists at a specific index using `arr.includes(200)`. 2. `some`: Tests whether any element satisfies a condition using `arr.some(x => x === 200)`. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares the performance of these two options: * `arr.includes(200)`: This method returns `true` if an element with value `200` is found in the array, and `false` otherwise. * `arr.some(x => x === 200)`: This method returns `true` as soon as it finds an element with value `200`, and continues iterating over the rest of the array. **Pros and Cons** * **Includes**: Pros: + Simple and intuitive syntax + Fast performance (since it uses a linear search algorithm) Cons: + May return false positives if there are duplicates in the array + May be slower for very large arrays since it needs to iterate over all elements to find the match * **Some**: Pros: + Faster performance than `includes` since it can stop iterating as soon as a match is found Cons: + May return false positives if there are duplicates in the array (since it only checks one element) + Less intuitive syntax compared to `includes` **Library/Functionality** There is no external library or functionality used in this benchmark, aside from built-in JavaScript methods. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** None of the code in this benchmark uses any special JavaScript features or syntax. It only employs basic array operations and conditional statements. **Other Alternatives** If you need to find the index of an element in an array, other alternatives could be: * `arr.indexOf(200)`: Similar to `includes`, but returns the index of the first occurrence instead of a boolean value. * `arr.findIndex(x => x === 200)`: Similar to `some`, but returns the index of the first occurrence instead of a boolean value. Keep in mind that the performance differences between these alternatives may vary depending on the specific use case and array size.
Related benchmarks:
testing--js
Test reverse map and forEach
testoffors
testoffors1
tmpcanvas
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?