Benchmark: Math.abs vs .includes

Tests:

Math.abs()
const diff = Math.abs(-1); if ((diff == 1) || (diff == 0)){ return true; } else { return false; }
.includes()
const diff = [-1, 0, 1]; if (diff.includes(-1)) { return true; } else { return false; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.abs()
.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 benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that represents a JavaScript microbenchmark. It has four properties:

* `Name`: A human-readable name for the benchmark.
* `Description`: An optional description of the benchmark, which is empty in this case.
* `Script Preparation Code`: An optional code snippet that should be executed before running the benchmark, which is also empty in this case.
* `Html Preparation Code`: Another optional code snippet that should be executed before running the benchmark, also empty in this case.

In summary, the benchmark definition is empty and doesn't require any preparation code to be executed.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark has two test cases:

1. **Math.abs()**
This test case has a single line of JavaScript code:
```javascript
const diff = Math.abs(-1);
if ((diff == 1) || (diff == 0)){ return true; } else { return false; }
```
This code calculates the absolute value of -1 using the `Math.abs()` function and then checks if it's equal to either 1 or 0.

2. **.includes()**
This test case has another single line of JavaScript code:
```javascript
const diff = [-1, 0, 1];
if (diff.includes(-1)) { return true; } else { return false; }
```
This code creates an array `diff` containing the values -1, 0, and 1, and then checks if -1 is included in the array using the `.includes()` method.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare the performance of:

* Using the `Math.abs()` function to calculate the absolute value of a number.
* Using the `.includes()` method to check if a value is present in an array.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

* **Math.abs()**:
	+ Pros: Simple, straightforward, and widely supported by JavaScript engines.
	+ Cons: May be slower than other approaches for certain types of inputs or operations.
* **.includes()**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster than `Math.abs()` for large arrays or complex logic, as it uses a specialized algorithm to check for membership.
	+ Cons: May be slower for small arrays or simple logic, and may have overhead due to the array search.

**Library**

In neither of the test cases is a specific library mentioned. However, if you're using a JavaScript engine that supports it, the `.includes()` method likely relies on a built-in algorithm provided by the engine.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special features or syntaxes used in these test cases. The code is straightforward and follows standard JavaScript conventions.

**Alternatives**

If you want to create a similar benchmark for other operations, here are some alternatives:

* Compare the performance of `Math.min()` vs. `Math.max()`
* Compare the performance of `String.indexOf()` vs. `Array.prototype.includes()`
* Compare the performance of different numerical comparison operators (e.g., `===`, `!=`, `<`, `>`)

Keep in mind that benchmarking JavaScript code can be complex, and results may vary depending on the specific use case and environment.

Related benchmarks:

Math.abs vs .includes (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: Math.abs() vs .includes()

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Math.abs()

.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):