Benchmark: Ar__ray concat vs_spread operator vs push_

Tests:

Array.prototype.concat
var arr1 = Array(100).fill({}); const arr2 = Array(100).fill({}); arr1 = arr1.concat(arr2);
spread operator
var arr1 = Array(100).fill({}); const arr2 = Array(100).fill({}); arr1 = [ ...arr1, ...arr2 ]
Push
const arr1 = Array(100).fill({}); const arr2 = Array(100).fill({}); arr1.push(...arr2);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.concat
spread operator
Push

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and analyze what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three different methods for concatenating arrays in JavaScript:

1. `Array.prototype.concat()`
2. The new ES6 spread operator (`[ ...arr, ... ]`)
3. Using the `push()` method with multiple arguments (`arr.push(...arr2)`)

**Options Compared**

The three options being compared are:

* `concat()`: A traditional method for concatenating arrays using the `Array.prototype.concat()` method.
* Spread Operator (`...`): The new ES6 spread operator that allows you to concatenate arrays by spreading them into a new array.
* `push()`: Using the `push()` method with multiple arguments to concatenate arrays.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. `concat()`:
	* Pros: Well-established, widely supported, and easy to understand.
	* Cons: Can be slower than other methods, especially for large arrays.
2. Spread Operator (`[ ... ]`):
	* Pros: Fast, modern, and concise syntax.
	* Cons: May not work in older browsers or environments that don't support ES6 features.
3. `push()`: (Note: This option is actually testing the spread operator's fallback behavior when using `push()`.)
	* Pros: Can be faster than `concat()` for large arrays, but may have performance issues with very long arrays due to the way `push()` handles internal array length limits.
	* Cons: Less readable and maintainable compared to other methods.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There is no library being used in this benchmark. The only special JS feature being tested is the spread operator, which is a modern ES6 feature that allows you to concatenate arrays using the `...` syntax.

**Other Considerations**

Some additional considerations when choosing between these options:

* **Browser Support**: If you need to support older browsers, you may want to use the traditional `concat()` method.
* **Performance**: For large datasets or performance-critical code, using the spread operator or `push()` might be a better choice.
* **Readability and Maintainability**: Choose the approach that best fits your team's coding style and conventions.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you need to concatenate arrays in JavaScript, here are some alternative approaches:

1. Using `Array.prototype.push.apply()`: This method applies the `push()` method to an array with multiple arguments.
2. Using a `for` loop: You can use a `for` loop to iterate over one array and push elements into another.
3. Using `Array.prototype.reduce()`: You can use the `reduce()` method to concatenate arrays, but this approach is typically less efficient than using `concat()` or spread operator.

Overall, the choice of which method to use depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal coding style preferences.

Related benchmarks:

Ar__ray concat vs_spread operator vs push_ (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method and push

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator vs Push

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.concat

spread operator

Push

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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