Benchmark: JS test gareko hai 4

Script Preparation code:


var array = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'];
var value = 'f';

Tests:

Array.includes
array.includes(value)
OR
'a' === value || 'b' === value || 'c' === value || 'd' === value || 'e' === value || 'f' === value;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.includes
OR

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:122.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/122.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 122 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.includes	26828342.0 Ops/sec
OR	531426080.0 Ops/sec

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 and explain what is tested on it.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition provides two test cases:

1. `array.includes(value)`: This test case measures the performance of the `includes()` method on an array.
2. `'a' === value || 'b' === value || 'c' === value || 'd' === value || 'e' === value || 'f' === value;`: This test case measures the performance of a custom OR comparison using string literals.

**Options Compared**

The two options compared are:

1. `array.includes(value)`
2. Custom OR comparison using string literals (`'a' === value || ...`)

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of each option:

### Array includes()

* **Pros:**
	+ Simple and intuitive method
	+ Fast lookup time (average O(1) complexity)
	+ Widely supported by most modern browsers and Node.js versions
* **Cons:**
	+ Can be slower for very large arrays or specific edge cases
	+ May not perform well on older browsers or outdated JavaScript engines

### Custom OR comparison using string literals

* **Pros:**
	+ Often faster than `array.includes()` for small arrays or specific use cases
	+ More flexible, as it allows for dynamic value comparisons
* **Cons:**
	+ Requires manual iteration and comparison (O(n) complexity)
	+ May be slower for large arrays or complex comparisons
	+ Less intuitive and more error-prone than `array.includes()`

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, there is no explicit library usage. However, the use of modern JavaScript features like `includes()` method, template literals, and comparison operators (`===`) relies on the browser or Node.js implementation providing a suitable engine for executing the code.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. The test cases only utilize standard JavaScript language features.

**Other Alternatives**

For similar performance benchmarks:

1. `Array.prototype.some()`: This method can be used as an alternative to `includes()` for checking if at least one element matches a condition.
2. Custom implementation using `forEach` or `reduce()`: For more control over the comparison logic, developers could implement a custom solution using these methods.

Keep in mind that the performance differences between these alternatives may vary depending on specific use cases and browser/Node.js versions.

Related benchmarks:

JS test gareko hai 4 (version: 0)

asdasd

Comparing performance of: Array.includes vs OR

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.includes

OR

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):