Benchmark: includes vs has test

Script Preparation code:

var a = [
    "account-entity-icon-import",
    "account-settings",
    "activity-goal",
    "add-users",
    "advanced_customer_satisfaction",
    "all-apps",
    "api",
    "apple-chat",
    "assignment-rules",
    "audit-log",
    "auto-resolve",
    "automate-workflows",
    "block-ip",
    "business-hours-lg",
    "business-hours",
    "byot",
    "call-flow",
    "canned-response-lg",
    "canned-response",
    "chat-groups-lg",
    "chat-groups",
    "chat-languages",
    "chat-widget",
    "cm-survey",
    "contact-entity-icon-import",
    "conversation-properties",
    "crm-code-library",
    "crm-settings",
    "cross-domain",
    "currency",
    "custom-attribute",
    "custom-modules-import",
    "custom-modules",
    "deal-entity-icon-import",
    "deal-insights",
    "deal-pipeline",
    "domain-verification",
    "email_footer",
    "email_template",
    "eu-datacentre",
    "facebook",
    "faq-lg",
    "faq",
    "field-dependencies",
    "groups",
    "icon-advanced-automation",
    "icon-announcement",
    "icon-auto-assignment-rules",
    "icon-calendar-event-suggestions",
    "icon-chat-webhooks",
    "icon-cm-assistant",
    "icon-cm-labels",
    "icon-contacts-sync",
    "icon-conversation-sla",
    "icon-cpq-settings",
    "icon-create-tasks-and-tickets",
    "icon-crm-fields",
    "icon-custom-module",
    "icon-document-templates",
    "icon-forecasting-32px",
    "icon-incoming-emails",
    "icon-live-translate",
    "icon-mobile-chat-sdk",
    "icon-notify-me-form",
    "icon-sandbox",
    "icon-shopify-settings",
    "icon-sms",
    "icon-social-gbm",
    "icon-social-instagram",
    "icon-social-line",
    "icon-team-inbox",
    "icon-territories",
    "icon-transactional-emails",
    "icon-woocommerce-settings",
    "intelliassign",
    "ip-whitelisting",
    "ip",
    "js",
    "lead-entity-icon-import",
    "marketplace-apps",
    "marketplace-for-caller",
    "messages",
    "migration",
    "offline-exp",
    "outgoing-emails",
    "phone-groups",
    "phone-metrics",
    "pipelines",
    "plans-billing",
    "play-circle",
    "predictive-scoring",
    "product-entity-icon-import",
    "purchase-number",
    "quick-access",
    "sales-groups",
    "satisfaction",
    "score-customization",
    "sdk-chat",
    "setting-facebook",
    "settings-account",
    "sip-phones",
    "status",
    "sto",
    "subscription_types",
    "support_email_configuration",
    "threads",
    "topics-lg",
    "topics",
    "user-entity-icon-import",
    "users-lg",
    "voicemail-drops",
    "web-js",
    "webforms",
    "whatsapp",
    "workflows"
];
var b = new Set(a)

Tests:

includes test
return a.includes('whatsapp')
has test
return b.has('whatsapp')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
includes test
has test

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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/112.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 112 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
includes test	30250516.0 Ops/sec
has test	30778734.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of JavaScript microbenchmarks can be a complex task, as it involves understanding the nuances of how different approaches impact execution speed.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark tests two different approaches for checking if a string contains a specific substring: `includes` and `has`. The input arrays `a` and `b` contain over 100 strings, which are then used to create sets using `Set()` constructor. These sets are compared with the presence of the string 'whatsapp' using both `includes` and `has` methods.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **`includes` method**: The `includes` method is a built-in JavaScript method that checks if a string contains a specific substring.
2. **`has` method**: The `has` method is not a standard JavaScript method, but it's a custom implementation of the `includes` method for sets.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **`includes` method**:
	* Pros: Fast and widely supported across browsers and versions.
	* Cons: Can be slow for large strings or arrays due to the need to iterate over each character.
2. **`has` method (custom implementation)**:
	* Pros: Optimized for set operations, potentially faster than `includes` for large sets or arrays.
	* Cons: Not a standard JavaScript method, which may lead to compatibility issues across browsers and versions.

**Other Considerations**

When dealing with large datasets, other factors can impact performance:

1. **Cache efficiency**: The way data is cached in memory can significantly affect performance. In this case, the use of `Set()` creates an optimized cache.
2. **JavaScript engine optimizations**: Different JavaScript engines (e.g., V8 in Chrome) may optimize certain methods or operations differently.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, no external libraries are used besides the built-in `Set()` constructor and string manipulation functions like `includes` and `has`.

Related benchmarks:

includes vs has test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: includes test vs has test

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

includes test

has test

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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