Benchmark: includes vs equality

Script Preparation code:

const mystring = "0x257Bc6Ed9c035E2A7E1fd9F64F1718205B198c54"

Tests:

includes
const mystring = "0x257Bc6Ed9c035E2A7E1fd9F64F1718205B198c54" mystring.includes("257Bc6Ed9c035E2A7E1fd9F64F1718205B198c54");
equals
const mystring = "0x257Bc6Ed9c035E2A7E1fd9F64F1718205B198c54" mystring == "0x257Bc6Ed9c035E2A7E1fd9F64F1718205B198c54";

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
includes
equals

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 123 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
includes	152938080.0 Ops/sec
equals	168034224.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that describes the test case:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark, which is "includes vs equality".
* `Description`: An empty string indicating no description for this benchmark.
* `Script Preparation Code`: A JavaScript code snippet that creates a constant variable `mystring` and assigns it a specific hexadecimal value. This variable will be used in the test cases.
* `Html Preparation Code`: An empty string indicating no HTML preparation code is needed.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. `includes`
	* The benchmark definition consists of a JavaScript code snippet that checks if the string `mystring` includes another specific hexadecimal value using the `includes()` method.
2. `equals`
	* The benchmark definition consists of a JavaScript code snippet that checks if the string `mystring` is equal to another specific hexadecimal value using the `==` operator.

**Comparison**

The two test cases compare the performance of the following approaches:

1. `includes()`: Checks if a substring exists within the original string.
2. `==` (equality operator): Compares the exact values of two strings.

**Pros and Cons**

* `includes()`:
	+ Pros: More efficient for substring matching, especially when dealing with large strings.
	+ Cons: May return false positives if the substring is not unique in the original string.
* `==`:
	+ Pros: Provides an exact value comparison, which can be useful for certain use cases.
	+ Cons: May be slower than `includes()` due to the overhead of comparing values.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There is no specific library being used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the `==` operator uses a special JavaScript feature called "loose equality" or "strict equality." This feature compares the actual value of two variables, taking into account things like NaN (Not a Number) and undefined.

**Other Considerations**

This benchmark is likely designed to test the performance differences between these two approaches in various scenarios. By comparing the execution times of `includes()` and `==`, the results can help identify which approach is more efficient and suitable for specific use cases.

**Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches that could be tested in this benchmark include:

* Using regular expressions instead of `includes()`
* Using a custom implementation of string comparison, such as using bitwise operations
* Comparing strings using different algorithms, like Boyer-Moore or Knuth-Morris-Pratt

Keep in mind that the specific alternatives will depend on the goals and requirements of the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

includes vs equality (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: includes vs equals

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

includes

equals

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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