Run results for: Filter with include vs filter without include

Run details:

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/92.0.4515.131 Safari/537.36

Browser: Chrome 92

Operating system: Windows

Device Platform: Desktop

Date tested: 2 years ago

Test name	Executions per second
Filter 100 items with include	97391.7 Ops/sec
Filter 100 items without include	81213.6 Ops/sec
Filter 1000 items with include	3606.1 Ops/sec
Filter 1000 items without include	7856.6 Ops/sec

Script Preparation code:

var types = ['Type1', 'Type2', 'Type3'];
var getType = (i) => types[i % 3];
var fillList = (numberOfItems) => {
    const list = [];
    for (var i = 0; i < numberOfItems; i++) {
        list.push({
            name: `dataItem${i}`,
            value: i,
            type: getType(i)
        });
    }
    return list;
};

var dataItems100 = fillList(100);
var dataItems1000 = fillList(1000);

var dataItems100OfType1And2 = dataItems100.filter(dataItem => dataItem.type === types[0] || dataItem.type === types[1])
var dataItems1000OfType1And2 = dataItems1000.filter(dataItem => dataItem.type === types[0] || dataItem.type === types[1])

Tests:

Filter 100 items with include
dataItems100.filter(dataItem => !dataItems100OfType1And2.includes(dataItem));
Filter 100 items without include
dataItems100.filter(dataItem => dataItem.type !== types[0] && dataItem.type !== types[1]);
Filter 1000 items with include
dataItems1000.filter(dataItem => !dataItems1000OfType1And2.includes(dataItem));
Filter 1000 items without include
dataItems1000.filter(dataItem => dataItem.type !== types[0] && dataItem.type !== types[1]);

Run results for: Filter with include vs filter without include

A comparison between a filter using include vs the same filter without include

Filter 100 items with include

Filter 100 items without include

Filter 1000 items with include

Filter 1000 items without include