Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
startswith vs includes2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
includes vs startsWith
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
includes
const str = "https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/a-sketch-a-day-207420.appspot.com/o/" str.includes("firebasestorage")
startsWith
const str = "https://firebasestorage.googleapis.com/v0/b/a-sketch-a-day-207420.appspot.com/o/" str.startsWith("https://fire")
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
includes
startsWith
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 break down the provided benchmark and its test cases. **Benchmark Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark definition consists of two individual test cases: `startsWith` and `includes`. These test cases compare the performance of two different string comparison methods in JavaScript. **Options Compared** The two options being compared are: 1. **`str.startsWith("https://fire/")`**: This method checks if the string `str` starts with the specified substring `"https://fire/"`. 2. **`str.includes("firebasestorage")`**: This method checks if the string `str` includes the specified substring `"firebasestorage"`. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **`startsWith`**: * Pros: More efficient for matching a longer prefix, as it only requires traversing the string up to the match point. * Cons: May return false positives if the prefix is not exact. 2. **`includes`**: * Pros: Returns true for any substring within the original string, making it suitable for more general-purpose matching. * Cons: Less efficient than `startsWith` when searching for a specific prefix. **Library Used** None of the provided test cases use any external libraries. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** The benchmark uses two standard JavaScript methods: 1. **`includes()`**: Introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6), this method is part of the standard library and provides a simple way to check if a string includes a specified substring. 2. **`startsWith()`**: Also introduced in ES6, this method is similar to `includes()`, but checks for a more specific prefix. **Other Alternatives** In JavaScript, other methods that could be used for string comparison include: 1. **`indexOf()`**: Returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified substring. If not found, returns -1. 2. **`localeCompare()`**: Compares two strings using the current locale's rules and options. However, `includes()` and `startsWith()` are generally preferred over these alternatives due to their simplicity and efficiency. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The provided benchmark preparation code is empty, which means that the script being tested is already prepared by the user. In a real-world scenario, this code might include some setup or initialization steps to ensure consistent results across different browsers and environments.
Related benchmarks:
javascript startsWith() vs includes()
javascript startsWith() vs includes() for longer string
Js Search - String StartsWith vs Includes
check application json startswith vs includes
startsWith vs includes (when no match)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?