Benchmark: Compare Concat->Push with Spread->Concat with map

Tests:

Concat and Push
var init = [10,11,13,14]; var params = [{ val: [1, 2]},{ val: [3, 4]},{ val: [5, 6]},{ val: [7, 8]}]; init.push(...(params.flatMap(x => x.val))); console.log(init);
Spread And Concat
var init = [10,11,13,14]; var params = [{ val: [1, 2]},{ val: [3, 4]},{ val: [5, 6]},{ val: [7, 8]}]; init = init.concat(...params.map(x => x.val)); console.log(init);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Concat and Push
Spread And 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 llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing two different approaches to concatenate arrays in JavaScript:

1. **`push(...)`**: This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to expand an array, and then pushes each element from that expanded array onto a new array using `push()`.
2. **`concat(...)`** : This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to expand an array, and then concatenates each element from that expanded array onto a new array using `concat()`.

**Options compared**

The two approaches are being tested for their performance differences. The test is comparing which approach is faster in terms of execution speed.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **`push(...)`**:
	+ Pros:
		- Can be more efficient when dealing with large arrays, as it avoids creating a new array.
		- Can be more flexible, as `push()` can be used to add elements to an array in multiple places.
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower for small arrays or when working with older browsers that don't support the spread operator.
* **`concat(...)`**:
	+ Pros:
		- Widely supported by older browsers and environments.
		- Can be simpler to read and understand, especially for developers who are familiar with `concat()`.
	+ Cons:
		- Creates a new array for each concatenation, which can lead to memory issues for large datasets.

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library being used in these benchmark tests. However, the use of `flatMap()` (which is a part of the Array.prototype method) relies on the `es6` syntax, which is supported by modern browsers and environments.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

The use of spread operator (`...`) is a special JavaScript feature that was introduced in ES6 (EcmaScript 2015). It allows you to expand an array into multiple arguments, making it easier to work with arrays in functions and other contexts. The `flatMap()` method is also a part of the Array.prototype method, which was introduced in ES6.

**Other alternatives**

In the absence of these two approaches, developers might use other methods to concatenate arrays, such as:

* Using a loop to iterate over one array and push each element onto another.
* Creating a new array using `Array.prototype.slice()` or `Array.prototype.splice()`, and then concatenating it with the original array.

However, these alternatives are likely to be slower and less efficient than the two approaches being tested here.

Related benchmarks:

Compare Concat->Push with Spread->Concat with map (version: 1)

Compare Concat->Push with Spread->Concat

Comparing performance of: Concat and Push vs Spread And Concat

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Concat and Push

Spread And Concat

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):