Benchmark: bitwise vs compare vs includes

Script Preparation code:

var arr = ['a', 'b', 'c']

Tests:

bitwise
!!~arr.indexOf('c')
compare
arr.indexOf('c') > -1
includes
arr.includes('c')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
bitwise
compare
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 break down the provided benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Overview**

The given benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three different methods for checking if an element exists in an array: bitwise operation (`!!~arr.indexOf('c')`), comparison using `>` (`arr.indexOf('c') > -1`), and includes method (`arr.includes('c')`). The goal is to determine which method is the most efficient.

**Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. **Bitwise**: `!!~arr.indexOf('c')`
	* This test case uses bitwise operation to check if 'c' exists in the array.
	* `!!~` is a bitwise NOT operator (~) that flips all bits and then applies two's complement to the result. The `!!` part converts this result back to a boolean value (0 for false, 1 for true). This method is often referred to as "bitwise negation" or "arithmetic negation".
	* Pros: Can be faster than comparison methods since it's a single operation.
	* Cons: Less readable and maintainable due to its unconventional syntax.
2. **Comparison**: `arr.indexOf('c') > -1`
	* This test case uses the traditional comparison method, where `indexOf` returns the index of 'c' if found (or -1 if not), and then the result is compared with -1 using the greater-than operator (`>`).
	* Pros: More readable and maintainable than bitwise methods.
	* Cons: Requires a second operation to convert the result to a boolean value, which can be slower than the bitwise method.
3. **Includes**: `arr.includes('c')`
	* This test case uses the includes method provided by modern JavaScript arrays (introduced in ECMAScript 2015).
	* Pros: Most readable and maintainable of the three methods, as it clearly conveys its intent.
	* Cons: May be slower than bitwise methods due to its additional operation.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, some features like `!!~` rely on the fact that JavaScript supports bitwise operations and two's complement arithmetic. The includes method relies on the modern array prototype.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for checking if an element exists in an array include:

* Using a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the array: `for (var i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) { if (arr[i] === 'c') { ... } }`
* Using `in` operator (not commonly used for this purpose): `if ('c' in arr) { ... }`
* Using `Array.prototype.some()` method: `arr.some(function(element) { return element === 'c'; })`

Keep in mind that these alternatives might be slower and less efficient than the methods tested in the benchmark.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_13_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/68.0.3440.106 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 68 on Mac OS X 10.13.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
bitwise	7850514.0 Ops/sec
compare	7665375.5 Ops/sec
includes	9002517.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

bitwise vs compare vs includes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: bitwise vs compare vs includes

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

bitwise

compare

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):