Benchmark: many if vs includes

Tests:

many if
const value = 4 if (value === 1) { return value } else if (value === 1) { return value } else if (value === 2) { return value } else if (value === 3) { return value } else if (value === 4) { return value }
includes
const options = [1, 2, 3, 4] const value = 4 if (options.includes(4)) { return value }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
many if
includes

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net!

**Benchmark Definition and Options**

The provided JSON represents two benchmark definitions:

1. `many if`: This benchmark tests the performance of a sequence of nested `if` statements with varying numbers of conditions.
2. `includes`: This benchmark tests the performance of the `includes()` method, which checks if an element exists in an array.

In both benchmarks, the script preparation code is empty, indicating that no specific setup or initialization is required before running the test.

**Options Compared**

The two benchmarks compare different approaches to handling the repeated use of `value` and `options`:

1. **Many if**: This approach uses a chain of nested `if` statements to evaluate multiple conditions.
2. **Includes**: This approach uses the `includes()` method, which checks if an element exists in an array.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief analysis of each approach:

* **Many if**:
	+ Pros: Simple and straightforward implementation, doesn't require any additional libraries or imports.
	+ Cons: Performance can degrade with increasing complexity, as the number of conditions increases.
* **Includes**:
	+ Pros: Efficient use of `includes()` method, which is optimized for performance, especially when dealing with large arrays.
	+ Cons: Requires importing the `Array.prototype.includes()` method (not shown in this example), which may add a small overhead.

**Library and Purpose**

In both benchmarks, no external libraries are used. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript engines, like V8 in Chrome, optimize the `includes()` method by using a binary search algorithm under the hood.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JS feature or syntax mentioned in these benchmark definitions.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few examples:

1. **Switch statement**: Instead of using nested `if` statements, you could use a switch statement to evaluate multiple conditions.
2. **Map-based approach**: You could use the `Array.prototype.map()` method to create an array of values and then check if any element matches the condition.
3. **Regex-based approach**: Depending on the specific requirements, you might be able to optimize the search using regular expressions.

Keep in mind that these alternative approaches may introduce additional complexity or overhead, which could affect performance.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 11 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
many if	1012566656.0 Ops/sec
includes	1013852992.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

many if vs includes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: many if vs includes

Created: 11 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

many if

includes

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):