Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
some unique name na prawde + mapa
(version: 0)
Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method
Comparing performance of:
spread operator vs concat
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
spread operator
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [...params].map(param => Number.parseInt(param));
concat
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [].concat(params).map(param => Number.parseInt(param));
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
spread operator
concat
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
llama3.1:latest
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Description** The benchmark compares two approaches to achieve similar results: using the ES6 spread operator (`...`) versus the traditional `concat()` method. **Test Cases** There are two test cases: 1. **Spread Operator**: This test uses the spread operator (`[...]`) to create a new array from an existing one, and then maps each element to its integer value using `Number.parseInt()`. 2. **Concat Method**: This test uses the traditional `concat()` method to concatenate the elements of an existing array with a new empty array, and then maps each element to its integer value using `Number.parseInt()`. **Library Usage** No external libraries are used in this benchmark. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The ES6 spread operator (`...`) is used in the first test case. This feature allows you to expand an existing iterable (like an array) into a new array. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **Spread Operator**: * Pros: More concise and expressive code, easier to read. * Cons: May be slower than `concat()` for large arrays due to the overhead of creating a new array. 2. **Concat Method**: * Pros: Generally faster than the spread operator for large arrays, as it avoids creating a new array. * Cons: More verbose and less expressive code. Other considerations: * The benchmark results show that the spread operator is significantly slower than the `concat()` method in this specific scenario. * However, for small to medium-sized arrays, the difference may be negligible. * If performance is critical, using `concat()` might be a better choice. But if readability and conciseness are more important, the spread operator could be preferred. **Alternatives** Other alternatives to achieve similar results include: 1. Using `map()` directly on the existing array without creating a new one: `params.map(Number.parseInt)`. 2. Using a loop to iterate over the elements of the existing array and convert them to integers. 3. Using a library like Lodash or Underscore.js, which provides optimized functions for array operations. Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance profiles depending on the specific use case.
Related benchmarks:
Array.prototype.concat vs Spread operator
Array.prototype.concat vs Spread operator
concat 2 arrays: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator
ES6 Array concat vs spread operator
Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator 12
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?