Benchmark: Native vs Lodash.js contains / fork

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var max1 = 100000; // 100,000 (100 Thousand)
var max2 = 10000000; // 10,000,000 (10 Million)
var max3 = 100000000;

var arr1 = [];
//for (var i = 0; i <= max1; i++) { arr1.push(i); }

var arr2 = [];
for (var i = 0; i <= max2; i++) { arr2.push(i); }

var arr3 = [];
for (var i = 0; i <= max3; i++) { arr3.push(i); }

Tests:

Native_include
arr2.includes(-100000);
Native_index of
arr2.indexOf(-100000);
lodash
_.includes(arr2, -100000);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native_include
Native_index of
lodash

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!

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros/cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing three JavaScript methods: native `includes` and `indexOf`, as well as Lodash.js implementation of `_includes`.

**Native vs. Lodash.js contains/fork**

This test case compares the performance of two approaches:

1. **Native**: Using built-in JavaScript functions for `includes` and `indexOf`.
2. **Lodash.js**: Using the popular utility library Lodash.js, which provides a more concise way to achieve similar functionality.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Native**:
	+ Pros: Built-in functions are likely to be optimized by JavaScript engines.
	+ Cons: May have slower performance due to interpreter overhead or cache misses.
* **Lodash.js**:
	+ Pros: More concise code, potential for better caching or optimization opportunities.
	+ Cons: Introduces an additional dependency (the Lodash library), which may not be desirable in all cases.

**Library: Lodash.js**

Lodash.js is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more. The `_includes` function is part of the Lodash.js suite, providing a more concise way to check if an element is included in an array.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax**

None are explicitly mentioned in the provided code.

**Other Alternatives:**

If you're interested in exploring alternative methods for `includes` and `indexOf`, here are some options:

* **ES6's Optional Chaining**: You can use optional chaining (`?.`) to achieve similar results, e.g., `arr2['includes'](-100000)`. However, this approach may not be as performant or widely supported.
* **Other libraries or frameworks**: Depending on the specific requirements, other libraries like Ramda.js or Array.prototype's built-in methods (e.g., `findIndex()`) might offer alternative solutions.

Keep in mind that these alternatives are not explicitly mentioned in the provided code and may have different performance characteristics.

Related benchmarks:

Native vs Lodash.js contains / fork (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native_include vs Native_index of vs lodash

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native_include

Native_index of

lodash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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