Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
JQuery and Native JS: check exist element in array
(version: 0)
Find the best approach for check exist element in array
Comparing performance of:
JQuery inArray vs indexOf vs includes
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.4.1/jquery.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var array = []; var index = 0; while (index < 1000) { array.push(index++); }
Tests:
JQuery inArray
let isExistElement = $.inArray(500, array) >= 0;
indexOf
let isExistElement = array.indexOf(500) >= 0;
includes
let isExistElement = array.includes(500);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
JQuery inArray
indexOf
includes
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript benchmarks and explain what's happening on the provided JSON. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is designed to compare three approaches for checking if an element exists in an array: 1. Using jQuery's `$.inArray()` method 2. Using the native JavaScript `indexOf()` method 3. Using the native JavaScript `includes()` method The benchmark aims to find the most efficient approach for this specific task. **Options Compared** Here are the options being compared, along with their pros and cons: 1. **JQuery inArray** * Purpose: To use jQuery's `$.inArray()` method, which is a wrapper around the native JavaScript `indexOf()` method. * Pros: + Easy to read and write, especially for those familiar with jQuery. + Can be useful if you need to work with multiple DOM elements simultaneously. * Cons: + Adds unnecessary overhead due to the jQuery library being loaded. + May not be as fast as native JavaScript methods. 2. **indexOf** * Purpose: To use the native JavaScript `indexOf()` method, which searches for a specific value in an array. * Pros: + Fast and efficient, especially for large arrays. + Native JavaScript implementation means no additional overhead from libraries. * Cons: + May not be as readable or intuitive for those unfamiliar with the method. + Can return -1 if the element is not found, which might require additional checks. 3. **includes** * Purpose: To use the native JavaScript `includes()` method, which returns a boolean indicating whether an element is present in an array. * Pros: + Concise and readable syntax. + Returns a boolean value, making it easier to handle results. * Cons: + Introduced in ECMAScript 2019, so might not be supported in older browsers or environments. + Can be slower than `indexOf()` for very large arrays. **Library Usage** The benchmark uses jQuery's `$.inArray()` method, which is a wrapper around the native JavaScript `indexOf()` method. This means that even though we're comparing native JavaScript methods, the presence of jQuery introduces some overhead due to the library being loaded. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's commonly used in modern JavaScript development. **Other Alternatives** If you wanted to compare additional approaches for checking if an element exists in an array, you might consider: * Using `Array.prototype.some()` or `Array.prototype.every()` * Implementing a custom search algorithm using bitwise operations * Using a library like Lodash's `includes` function Keep in mind that the performance differences between these approaches would depend on the specific use case and requirements. The benchmark results provided show the execution times for each test case, indicating which approach is the fastest. In this case, the native JavaScript `includes()` method is the clear winner, followed closely by `indexOf()`. The jQuery `$.inArray()` method trails behind, due to its added overhead from the library being loaded. As a developer, understanding these trade-offs and choosing the most efficient approach for your specific use case can help you write faster, more maintainable code.
Related benchmarks:
JQuery each vs for ... of for array
$.each vs Array.forEach
for loop vs Array.some
Correct for loop vs Array.some
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?