Actions
Feature #10227
closed
array.include? is much slower than array.index
Feature #10227: array.include? is much slower than array.index
Description
I benchmarked both, and found that include? is about ten times slower than index (for the test below).
require 'benchmark' a = (1..1_000_000).to_a num = 100_000 reps = 100 Benchmark.bmbm do |bm| bm.report('include?') do reps.times { a.include? num } end bm.report('index') do reps.times { a.index num } end end user system total real include? 0.330000 0.000000 0.330000 ( 0.334328) index 0.040000 0.000000 0.040000 ( 0.039812) As per bug #8820, index has been optimised to use rb_equal_opt [1], whereas includes? uses rb_equal [2]. (Changelog here [3].)
[1] https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/c6da45b74cf9d420803c6ccbf4d527b1dfe4014e/array.c#L1462
[2] https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/c6da45b74cf9d420803c6ccbf4d527b1dfe4014e/array.c#L3851
[3] http://svn.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi?revision=42704&view=revision
Updated by Glass_saga (Masaki Matsushita) about 11 years ago
- Assignee set to Glass_saga (Masaki Matsushita)
- Tracker changed from Bug to Feature
- Status changed from Open to Assigned
Updated by Anonymous about 11 years ago
- Status changed from Assigned to Closed
- % Done changed from 0 to 100
Applied in changeset r47659.
- array.c: use rb_equal_opt() for performance improvement.
[ruby-core:64954] [Feature #10227]
Updated by Glass_saga (Masaki Matsushita) about 11 years ago
Result of benchmark script the same as ruby-core:64954.
Rehearsal -------------------------------------------- include? 0.100000 0.000000 0.100000 ( 0.093951) index 0.090000 0.000000 0.090000 ( 0.092334) ----------------------------------- total: 0.190000sec user system total real include? 0.090000 0.000000 0.090000 ( 0.081303) index 0.080000 0.000000 0.080000 ( 0.081296) Actions