Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign performance (test 2)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Using the spread operator vs Using Object.assign
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Using the spread operator
const firstObject = { sampleData: 'Hello world' } const secondObject = { moreData: 'foo bar' } const finalObject = { ...firstObject, ...secondObject };
Using Object.assign
const firstObject = { sampleData: 'Hello world' } const secondObject = { moreData: 'foo bar' } const finalObject = Object.assign({}, firstObject, secondObject);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Using the spread operator
Using Object.assign
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):
Let's break down what's being tested in this benchmark. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: using the JavaScript spread operator (`...`) and `Object.assign` to merge two objects into a single object. **Options Compared** There are two options being compared: 1. **Using the spread operator**: This approach uses the syntax `const finalObject = { ...firstObject, ...secondObject };` to create a new object that inherits properties from both `firstObject` and `secondObject`. 2. **Using Object.assign**: This approach uses the method `const finalObject = Object.assign({}, firstObject, secondObject);` to create a new object by merging `firstObject` and `secondObject`. **Pros and Cons** * **Using the spread operator:** + Pros: - More concise and readable syntax. - Less verbose than using `Object.assign`. + Cons: - May have performance overhead due to the creation of a new object, even if it's not needed (as in this benchmark). * **Using Object.assign:** + Pros: - Can be more efficient for large objects or when performance is critical. + Cons: - More verbose syntax. **Library and Purpose** In both test cases, no specific library is used. However, it's worth noting that `Object.assign` is a built-in method in JavaScript. **Special JS Features/Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being used in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing the performance of two common approaches to merging objects. **Other Considerations** When designing benchmarks like this, consider factors such as: * Garbage collection overhead * Object size and complexity * Browser/JavaScript engine variations * Specific use cases (e.g., merging large datasets) Keep in mind that benchmarking is an art, and different results may occur depending on various factors. **Alternatives** Other approaches to merging objects could be considered for alternative benchmarks: 1. **Destructuring**: Using destructuring syntax (`{ ...firstObject, ...secondObject }`) instead of the spread operator. 2. **Array methods**: Using `Array.prototype.concat()` or other array methods to merge objects. 3. **Custom merging functions**: Implementing a custom function to merge objects, potentially with optimizations for performance. These alternatives could provide interesting insights into different aspects of object merging and performance optimization.
Related benchmarks:
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign performance (single addition)
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign performance 2 - kevin
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign performance - Kien Nguyen
Object.assign() vs spread operator (New object)
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign performance test number 99
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?