Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
array insertion, splice vs copyWithin
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
splice vs copyWithin - push vs copyWithin - length
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 0];
Tests:
splice
arr.splice(20, 0, 1337);
copyWithin - push
arr.push(0); arr.copyWithin(21, 20); arr[20] = 1337;
copyWithin - length
arr.length += 1; arr.copyWithin(21, 20); arr[20] = 1337;
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
splice
copyWithin - push
copyWithin - length
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):
Measuring that net is a fantastic resource for JavaScript benchmarking. Let's break down the provided JSON, which represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition consists of two parts: `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`. However, in this case, both are empty. This means that the benchmark script is self-contained and does not require any external HTML or script files to be executed. The `Script Preparation Code` defines a JavaScript array `arr` with 40 elements, which will be used as input for the benchmark tests. **Individual Test Cases** There are three individual test cases: 1. **splice**: This test case uses the `splice()` method to insert an element at index 20. The script `arr.splice(20, 0, 1337);` is executed. 2. **copyWithin - push**: This test case combines two operations: pushing a new element and using the `copyWithin()` method with `push` as the source array. The script `arr.push(0)`, followed by `arr.copyWithin(21, 20)`, and finally setting `arr[20] = 1337;` is executed. 3. **copyWithin - length**: This test case uses the `copyWithin()` method with only the length of the source array as an argument, while also pushing a new element. The script `arr.length += 1;`, followed by `arr.copyWithin(21, 20)`, and finally setting `arr[20] = 1337;` is executed. **Options Compared** The three test cases are comparing different approaches to inserting an element at index 20: * **splice**: Directly uses the `splice()` method. * **copyWithin - push**: Uses the `push()` method to add a new element and then uses `copyWithin()` to copy elements from the original array. * **copyWithin - length**: Uses the `length` property of the source array (which is 1 in this case) as an argument to `copyWithin()`, effectively creating a new subarray. **Pros and Cons** Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach: * **splice**: + Pros: Simple, efficient, and widely supported. + Cons: Can be slow for large arrays due to the dynamic resizing required. * **copyWithin - push**: + Pros: Allows for more control over the insertion point and can be faster than `splice`. + Cons: Requires pushing a new element before using `copyWithin()`, which may incur additional overhead. * **copyWithin - length**: + Pros: Creates a new subarray without modifying the original array, reducing overhead. + Cons: May not be as efficient for large arrays or complex operations. **Libraries and Special JS Features** In this benchmark, there are no specific libraries used. However, if you were to use a library like Lodash, you might see variations of these tests using its `spawn` function or other utility methods. The only special JavaScript feature that's being tested is the use of `copyWithin()` with different arguments, which highlights its flexibility and versatility. **Alternatives** If you wanted to test similar scenarios, you could consider the following alternatives: * For an array insertion benchmark: + Use a library like Faker.js to generate random arrays. + Test different algorithms for inserting elements at arbitrary positions. * For a copy operation benchmark (e.g., `slice()`, `subarray()`): + Test different libraries or custom implementations of these methods. Keep in mind that the choice of alternatives will depend on your specific testing goals and requirements.
Related benchmarks:
splice vs spread operator for adding elements into very large 2D arrays
array.splice vs array.length
Remove element from array splice vs copyWithin
Splice vs Assignation
Array.splice(0, N) vs Array.length === N
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?