Benchmark: inclues vs dot notation

Script Preparation code:

var arr = ['1', '2', '3', '4']
var obj = { entities: { '4': {id: '4' } } }

Tests:

include
arr.includes('4')
obj
obj && obj.entities && obj.entities['4'] && obj.entities['4'].id

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
include
obj

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON benchmark definition and explain what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing the performance difference between two approaches to access an element in an array or object: `includes` (dot notation) vs dot notation.

In this specific benchmark, we have two individual test cases:

1. `arr.includes('4')`
2. `obj && obj.entities && obj.entities['4'] && obj.entities['4'].id`

Both tests aim to retrieve the value of the key `'4'` from an array (`arr`) and an object (`obj`), respectively.

**Options compared**

The two approaches being tested are:

1. **`includes` (dot notation)**: This method uses the `includes()` function, which is a built-in JavaScript method that checks if a value exists in an array.
2. **Dot notation**: This approach directly accesses the element using dot notation (`obj.entities['4'] && obj.entities['4'].id`).

**Pros and cons of each approach**

1. **`includes` (dot notation)`**
	* Pros:
		+ More concise and readable code
		+ Less chance of off-by-one errors when working with arrays
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower than dot notation for large datasets due to the additional function call overhead
2. **Dot notation**
	* Pros:
		+ Often faster than `includes()` because it avoids the extra function call and directly accesses the element
	* Cons:
		+ More verbose code, which can increase maintenance costs
		+ Prone to off-by-one errors when working with arrays

**Library and purpose**

None of the provided benchmark definitions use a specific library. The `includes()` method is a built-in JavaScript function.

**Special JS features or syntax**

None are mentioned in this particular benchmark definition.

**Other alternatives**

Other approaches to access elements in an array or object include:

1. **Array.prototype.indexOf()**: Similar to `includes()`, but uses the `indexOf()` function to find the index of the element.
2. **Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty()**: A more verbose approach that checks if an object has a specific property using `hasOwnProperty()`.
3. **Using a for loop**: Iterating over the array or object using a for loop can also be used to access elements, but it may be slower than dot notation or `includes()`.

It's worth noting that these alternatives are not necessarily faster or more efficient than the approaches being tested in this benchmark. The performance difference between them is likely to be small and dependent on various factors, such as the size of the dataset and the JavaScript engine used.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/73.0.3683.86 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 73 on Windows 8.1

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
include	10431558.0 Ops/sec
obj	2376395.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

inclues vs dot notation (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: include vs obj

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

include

obj

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):