Benchmark: $.inArray vs Array.prototype.includes

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>

Tests:

$.inArray
$.inArray("House", ["Apartment", "School", "House"]);
Array.prototype.includes
["Apartment", "School", "House"].includes("House");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
$.inArray
Array.prototype.includes

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
$.inArray	13669000.0 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.includes	123401664.0 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 benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and some pros/cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares two methods for searching an array: `$inArray` (part of jQuery) and `Array.prototype.includes`. The test cases are designed to demonstrate which method is faster.

**Options Compared**

There are only two options being compared:

1. `$inArray`: A part of the jQuery library, specifically designed for finding elements in an array by value.
2. `Array.prototype.includes`: A built-in JavaScript method that checks if a specific value exists in an array.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each option:

* `$inArray`:
	+ Pros: Easy to use, especially when working with jQuery-specific data structures. Fast performance for simple searches.
	+ Cons: Not part of the built-in JavaScript API, relies on jQuery being loaded. May be slower than native `includes()` for very large arrays or complex searches.
* `Array.prototype.includes`:
	+ Pros: Part of the standard JavaScript API, making it widely supported and fast for most use cases. Can handle large arrays and complex searches efficiently.
	+ Cons: May not be as intuitive for developers without a strong background in JavaScript.

**Library and Purpose**

The jQuery library is a popular, feature-rich framework that simplifies DOM manipulation and event handling. `$inArray` is one of its utility methods, designed to make common array operations easier to perform.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being used in this benchmark, so I won't comment on them.

**Other Alternatives**

For searching arrays, other built-in JavaScript methods you might consider using (in addition to `Array.prototype.includes`) include:

* `indexOf()`: Similar to `includes()`, but returns the index of the first occurrence instead of a boolean value.
* `some()` and `every()`: Methods that check if at least one or all elements in an array meet a condition, respectively.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might have slightly different performance characteristics depending on your specific use case.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided script preparation code includes the jQuery library, which is necessary for using `$inArray`. The HTML preparation code adds a reference to this library.

Related benchmarks:

$.inArray vs Array.prototype.includes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: $.inArray vs Array.prototype.includes

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

$.inArray

Array.prototype.includes

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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