Benchmark: Set.has vs Array.includes with Small & Large Collections

Tests:

Set.has (10 items)
const mySet = new Set([0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]); const contains = mySet.has(9);
Array.includes
const myArray = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]; const contains = myArray.includes(9) ? true : false;
Set.has (1,000 items)
const myArray = []; for (let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { myArray.push(i); } const mySet = new Set(myArray); const contains = mySet.has(999);
Array.includes (1,000 items)
const myArray = []; for (let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { myArray.push(i); } const mySet = new Set(myArray); const contains = myArray.includes(i) ? true : false;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Previous results

ⓘ Get performance results from real users on your website with Request Metrics.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

Set.has vs Array.includes with Small & Large Collections (version: 0)