Benchmark: IndexOf vs Includes vs find

Script Preparation code:

var array = ['banana', 'sausage', 'jesus']

Tests:

indexOf
array.indexOf('sausage') !== 1
Includes
array.includes('sausage')
find
array.find(item => item === 'sausage')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
indexOf
Includes
find

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/91.0.4472.114 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 91 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
indexOf	6971607.5 Ops/sec
Includes	20624188.0 Ops/sec
find	7404646.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and analyze what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a microbenchmark that compares three different methods for searching an element within an array: `indexOf`, `includes`, and `find`. Each test case measures the execution time of these methods on a specific input string ("sausage") in a given JavaScript array.

**Options compared**

* `indexOf`: A method that returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value. If the value is not found, it returns `-1`.
* `includes`: A method that checks if the array includes the specified value without returning its index.
* `find`: A method that finds the first element in the array that satisfies the provided condition.

**Pros and Cons**

* **`indexOf`**: Pros: Simple and efficient for finding the exact index of an element. Cons: Returns `-1` if not found, which can be misleading. Also, it only searches for a single value.
* **`includes`**: Pros: Faster than `indexOf` for larger arrays or when searching for multiple values. Cons: Returns `true` or `false`, but does not return the index.
* **`find`**: Pros: More flexible and expressive than `indexOf`, as it returns the actual element if found. Cons: Slower than both `indexOf` and `includes` due to its iterative search.

**Library and purpose**

There is no library used in this benchmark. The methods being compared are built-in JavaScript methods, which means they are implemented natively by the JavaScript engine.

**Special JS features or syntax**

None mentioned.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to implement a custom solution for these search methods, some alternative approaches might include:

* Using `Array.prototype.some()` or `Array.prototype.every()` to achieve similar results as `includes`.
* Writing a simple loop to find the first matching element, similar to `find`.
* Utilizing more advanced techniques like binary searching (which is not applicable in this case due to the sequential nature of these methods).

For example, an alternative implementation for `indexOf` could involve using a binary search algorithm. However, given the simplicity and directness of the built-in methods, it's unlikely that a custom solution would offer significant performance improvements.

In summary, MeasureThat.net is testing the relative performance of three basic JavaScript array methods: `indexOf`, `includes`, and `find`. The benchmark provides insight into which method is fastest for searching an element in an array under specific conditions.

Related benchmarks:

IndexOf vs Includes vs find (version: 0)

Banana2

Comparing performance of: indexOf vs Includes vs find

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

indexOf

Includes

find

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):