Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Or vs Includes Test
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
returnOrInvalid vs returnOrValid vs returnIncludesInvalid vs returnIncludesValid
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
let a = [1,2] function returnOrInvalid() { return a[0] == 3 || a[1] == 3 } function returnOrValid() { return a[0] == 2 || a[1] == 2 } function returnIncludesInvalid() { return a.includes(3) } function returnIncludesValid() { return a.includes(2) }
Tests:
returnOrInvalid
returnOrInvalid()
returnOrValid
returnOrValid()
returnIncludesInvalid
returnIncludesInvalid()
returnIncludesValid
returnIncludesValid()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
returnOrInvalid
returnOrValid
returnIncludesInvalid
returnIncludesValid
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):
I'd be happy to explain the provided benchmark and its options. **Benchmark Overview** The test compares two approaches for comparing values in an array: 1. `or` (or, aka loose comparison) using the `==` operator. 2. `includes` method of the `Array` prototype. **What is being tested?** * The speed difference between these two approaches when checking if a specific value exists in an array. **Options Compared** The test compares the following options: 1. **Or Approach**: Using the loose comparison operator (`==`) to check if a value exists in the array. 2. **Includes Method**: Using the `includes()` method of the Array prototype to check if a value exists in the array. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** ### Or Approach (Loose Comparison) Pros: * Easy to understand and implement. * Well-supported by most JavaScript engines. Cons: * Not as efficient as the `includes` method, especially for large arrays. * Can lead to unexpected results due to type coercion or cultural differences in comparison rules. **Includes Method** Pros: * More efficient than the or approach for large arrays. * Provides a clear and consistent way to check for array membership. Cons: * May be slower for small arrays due to the overhead of the `includes` method. * May not work as expected if the array contains non-array values (e.g., objects). **Other Considerations** * The test assumes that the input array is populated with primitive values only. If the array may contain object references, the results may be different. * The test does not account for edge cases like null or undefined values in the comparison. **Library Usage** The `includes` method uses the built-in `Array.prototype.includes()` method, which is a part of the ECMAScript standard and supported by most modern JavaScript engines. **Special JS Features/Syntax** None mentioned explicitly in the provided benchmark. However, it's worth noting that modern JavaScript engines support various optimizations and techniques to improve performance, such as: * Array methods (e.g., `Array.prototype.includes()`) * Caching and memoization * Use of native WebAssembly (WASM) for performance-critical code **Alternatives** Other approaches for checking array membership include: 1. Using a custom implementation of the `includes` method. 2. Utilizing bitwise operations or regular expressions to perform membership checks. 3. Employing more advanced techniques like parallel processing or GPU acceleration (for high-performance applications). These alternatives may offer better performance but are often more complex and less readable than the built-in `includes` method. Please let me know if you have any further questions!
Related benchmarks:
typeof repetition vs array grouping
Testing for false vs === undefined for undefined member
Testing for false vs === undefined vs hasOwnProperty for undefined member
typeof Undefined vs ===
void 0 vs undefined vs variable containing undefined
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?