Benchmark: IndexOf vs Includes -- Strings

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var s = 'bananasausagejesus'

Tests:

IndexOf
s.indexOf('sausage') !== -1
Includes
s.includes('sausage')

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:

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.

**What is being tested?**

The test cases are comparing the performance of two string methods:

1. `indexOf()`
2. `includes()`

These methods are part of the JavaScript String prototype, which allows you to search for a substring within a string.

**Options compared**

The test is comparing the execution time of these two methods:

* `s.indexOf('sausage')` (IndexOf)
* `s.includes('sausage')` (Includes)

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **indexOf()**
	* Pros:
		+ Generally faster than `includes()` because it returns as soon as the substring is found, rather than scanning the entire string.
		+ Can be more efficient when searching for a specific character in a large string.
	* Cons:
		+ Returns -1 if the substring is not found, which might lead to errors if not handled properly.
2. **includes()**
	* Pros:
		+ More modern and widely adopted than `indexOf()` in some browsers (e.g., Safari).
		+ Can be more readable and intuitive for developers who are familiar with its behavior.
	* Cons:
		+ Generally slower than `indexOf()` because it needs to scan the entire string even if the substring is found early on.

**Library usage**

The test uses Lodash, a popular JavaScript utility library. In this case, it's importing the `lodash.min.js` file in the HTML preparation code, which provides the `includes()` function for testing purposes.

**Special JS features or syntax**

There doesn't appear to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being used in these test cases.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to implement this benchmark using a different approach, here are some options:

1. **Manual implementation**: You could manually implement the `indexOf()` and `includes()` functions using loops or recursive approaches.
2. **Alternative string methods**: Depending on the browser or JavaScript engine being tested, other string methods like `str.includes()` (Chrome) or `str.indexOf()` (Firefox) might be used instead.
3. **Different test cases**: You could create more test cases to compare different scenarios, such as searching for multiple substrings or handling edge cases.

Keep in mind that the specific approach and libraries used can depend on the requirements of your project and the target audience.

Related benchmarks:

IndexOf vs Includes -- Strings (version: 0)

Banana

Comparing performance of: IndexOf vs Includes

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

IndexOf

Includes

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):