Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
spread vs assign fixed
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Using the spread operator vs Using Object.assign
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Registered User
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):
I'll break down what's being tested in this benchmark, and explain the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations. **What is being tested?** The benchmark compares two approaches to create a new object by merging two existing objects: using the spread operator (`...`) and using `Object.assign()`. The test case uses JavaScript, which is a language that supports these two approaches for creating new objects. **Options compared** 1. **Using the spread operator (`...`):** * This approach creates a new object by taking each key-value pair from one or more source objects (in this case, `firstObject` and `secondObject`) and adding them to a new object. * Pros: concise, readable, and efficient for creating small to medium-sized objects. * Cons: may not be suitable for large objects or complex merging scenarios. Also, it can lead to unexpected behavior if the keys are not unique between the source objects. 2. **Using `Object.assign()`:** * This approach creates a new object by calling the `assign()` method on an empty object (`{}`) and passing in one or more source objects (in this case, `firstObject` and `secondObject`) as arguments. * Pros: widely supported, efficient, and can handle complex merging scenarios. However, it may lead to less readable code compared to the spread operator approach. 3. **Other considerations** * The benchmark also tests the execution speed of each approach on different devices and browsers. **Library and special JS feature used** None mentioned in the provided information. However, JavaScript is a standard language that supports many features and libraries, including ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) features like the spread operator (`...`). **Other alternatives** * Other approaches to create new objects include: + `Object.create()`: creates a new object by cloning an existing object using the provided prototype. + Manual property assignment: creating a new object and assigning properties manually. These alternatives may have their own pros and cons, depending on the specific use case. For example, `Object.create()` can be useful when working with complex inheritance scenarios, while manual property assignment can lead to more readable code but is generally slower than using the spread operator or `Object.assign()`.
Related benchmarks:
toFixed -> Number vs Math.round
toFixed() vs Math.round().toString()
parseFloat(toFixed) vs Math.round()
toFixed vs Math.round() with numbers222
toFixed vs Math.round vs |(bitwise or)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?