Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Spread1 vs slice1
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Slice vs Spread
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Slice
var param = [1, 2, 3]; var copy = param.slice();
Spread
var param = [1, 2, 3]; var copy = [...param]
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Slice
Spread
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 definition is a simple JavaScript code snippet that creates an array `param` with three elements and then creates a copy of it using two different methods: the `slice()` method and the spread operator (`[...param]`). The purpose of the benchmark is to compare the performance of these two approaches. **Options Compared** The options being compared are: 1. **Slice Method**: The `slice()` method returns a shallow copy of the original array, creating a new array object. 2. **Spread Operator**: The spread operator (`[...param]`) creates a new array by spreading the elements of the original array. **Pros and Cons** * **Slice Method**: + Pros: widely supported in older browsers, easy to read and understand. + Cons: creates a shallow copy, which means it only copies the top-level elements of the array, leaving nested arrays or objects unchanged. This can lead to unexpected behavior if the original array contains complex data structures. * **Spread Operator**: + Pros: modern and efficient way to create new arrays, preserves the structure of nested arrays and objects. + Cons: requires support for modern JavaScript syntax ( ECMAScript 2015+), may not be supported in older browsers. **Library/Functionality** In this benchmark, there is no library or external function being used. The code snippet only includes built-in JavaScript methods (`slice()`, `[...]`). **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. **Other Alternatives** For creating copies of arrays, other alternatives exist: 1. **Array.prototype.concat()**: This method returns a new array containing all elements from the original array. 2. **Array.prototype.map()**: This method creates a new array with the same length as the original array, where each element is the result of applying a given function to the corresponding element in the original array. However, these alternatives are not being used in this specific benchmark. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The benchmark preparation code is empty, which means that the test cases are self-contained and do not require any external setup or initialization. Overall, this benchmark provides a simple and clear comparison of two common ways to create copies of arrays in JavaScript.
Related benchmarks:
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() vs Math.floorfaster test
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() to 1 decimal place
toFixed vs toPrecision vs bitwise 2
parseFloat(toFixed) vs Math.round()
toFixed + parse vs toPrecision vs Math.round() vs Math.floorfast
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?