Benchmark: IndexOf vs Includes in function

Script Preparation code:

var needle = () => {}
var arr = [() => {}, () => {}, () => {}, () => {}, () => {}, () => {}, () => {}, needle, () => {}, () => {}, () => {}, () => {}, () => {}]

Tests:

IndexOf
arr.indexOf(needle)
Includes
arr.includes(needle)

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Firefox 6 runs

IndexOf

62.0M/s

Includes

61.4M/s

View exact numbers

✓ IndexOf: 61,977,056 ops/sec
• Includes: 61,380,080 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
IndexOf
Includes

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:147.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/147.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 147 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Includes

31.0M/s

IndexOf

29.3M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Includes	31,020,062 Ops/sec
IndexOf	29,325,126 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark provided compares the performance of two JavaScript methods for searching an element in an array: `indexOf` and `includes`.

### Options Compared

1. **`arr.indexOf(needle)`**
   - **Description**: The `indexOf` method searches the array for a specified value and returns its first index if found. If the value is not found, it returns -1.
   - **Test Name**: "IndexOf"

2. **`arr.includes(needle)`**
   - **Description**: The `includes` method determines whether an array includes a certain value among its entries, returning true or false as appropriate.
   - **Test Name**: "Includes"

### Pros and Cons of Each Approach

#### `indexOf`

- **Pros**:
  - It is widely supported in all JavaScript environments, including very old versions.
  - Can be used for both value checking and index retrieval, making it versatile.
  
- **Cons**:
  - Returns -1 if the item is not found, which can sometimes lead to confusion since -1 might be a valid index in some scenarios.
  - A broader set of checks is required when determining if the element is present, as you need to handle the possibility of -1.

#### `includes`

- **Pros**:
  - More intuitive to use when you only need to check if an array contains a specific value. 
  - Returns a boolean (true or false), making it easier to use in conditional expressions, thus improving code readability.

- **Cons**:
  - May have slightly less support in older JavaScript environments (though this is becoming less of an issue as older browsers fall out of use).
  - Assumes the presence of `Object.is` semantics for strict comparison, which could affect the results when dealing with unique reference types or NaN.

### Considerations

When deciding to use one method over the other, consider the context in which you are working. If you require index information, `indexOf` may be the right choice. However, if you're simply concerned with the presence of an element, `includes` provides cleaner and more readable code.

### Benchmark Results

The benchmark results show that `indexOf` performs slightly better than `includes` in terms of executions per second:

- **IndexOf**: 97,362,200 executions per second
- **Includes**: 92,688,224 executions per second

While `indexOf` shows better performance in this benchmark, it’s essential to note that performance can vary based on various factors, including the specific JavaScript engine implementation and array size. In many practical applications, performance differences might be negligible for smaller datasets or less frequent operations.

### Alternative Approaches

1. **Using a Loop**: For very specific use cases, manually iterating through an array using a loop can be used for searching elements. This method can provide more control over how comparisons are made but at a cost of increased complexity and usually slower performance.

2. **Using a Set**: If duplicate values are not needed and you want faster lookups, consider using a `Set` for membership checks. Sets offer average-time complexity of O(1) for lookups, which can significantly improve performance in cases where you need to check membership frequently.

In conclusion, both `indexOf` and `includes` have their particular use cases in JavaScript development, and the choice between them should be guided by the specific requirements of the application and the importance of code readability versus raw performance.

IndexOf vs Includes in function (version: 1)

Banana

Comparing performance of: `IndexOf vs Includes`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

IndexOf

Includes

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Firefox 6 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

IndexOf vs Includes in function (version: 1)

Banana

Comparing performance of: IndexOf vs Includes

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

IndexOf

Includes

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Firefox 6 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `IndexOf vs Includes`