Benchmark: Set has vs object key bigger list

Script Preparation code:

var obj = (new Array(100000)).fill(null).reduce((prev, newVal) => {prev[Math.random() + ''] = Math.random() + ''; return prev; }, { sausage: 'tst' });
var array = Object.keys(obj);
var set = new Set(array);

Tests:

Includes
array.includes('sausage')
Object[key]
obj['sausage']
Set.has
set.has('saudage')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Includes
Object[key]
Set.has

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 132 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Set.has

148.0M/s

Includes

121.3M/s

Object[key]

104.0M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Set.has	147,995,904 Ops/sec
Includes	121,257,752 Ops/sec
Object[key]	104,016,992 Ops/sec

Set has vs object key bigger list (version: 1)

performance comparison of ways to find if an array contains a value

Comparing performance of: `Includes vs Object[key] vs Set.has`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Includes

Object[key]

Set.has

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Set has vs object key bigger list (version: 1)

performance comparison of ways to find if an array contains a value

Comparing performance of: Includes vs Object[key] vs Set.has

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Includes

Object[key]

Set.has

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Includes vs Object[key] vs Set.has`