Benchmark: Array.includes vs Set.has small

Script Preparation code:

var testArr = [];
for(let i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
  testArr.push(i);
}
var testSet = new Set(testArr);
var valuesToCheck = [0, 10, 20, 30, 40 ,50];

Tests:

Array.includes
let summ = 0; valuesToCheck.forEach(v => { if (testArr.includes(v)) { summ += v; } }); return summ;
Set.has
let summ = 0; valuesToCheck.forEach(v => { if (testSet.has(v)) { summ += v; } }); return summ;
Convert at runtime
let summ = 0; const testSet2 = new Set(testArr); valuesToCheck.forEach(v => { if (testSet2.has(v)) { summ += v; } }); return summ;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.includes
Set.has
Convert at runtime

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!

Array.includes vs Set.has small (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: `Array.includes vs Set.has vs Convert at runtime`

Created: 10 months ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Array.includes

Set.has

Convert at runtime

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Array.includes vs Set.has small (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Array.includes vs Set.has vs Convert at runtime

Created: 10 months ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Array.includes

Set.has

Convert at runtime

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Comparing performance of: `Array.includes vs Set.has vs Convert at runtime`