Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Spread Map vs Fill Map
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Spread Map vs Fill Map
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Spread Map
const arr = [...Array(10)].map( (val) => val)
Fill Map
const arr = Array(10).fill(0).map( (val) => val)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Spread Map
Fill Map
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 the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** The "Spread Map vs Fill Map" benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two different approaches: using the spread operator (`...`) or `fill(0)` when creating an array and then mapping over it. **Options Compared** Two options are compared: 1. **Spread Operator (`...`)**: This approach uses the spread operator to create a new array from an existing array. For example, `const arr = [...Array(10)].map((val) => val)`. 2. **Fill Method (`fill(0)`)**: This approach uses the `fill()` method to create an array filled with zeros and then maps over it. For example, `const arr = Array(10).fill(0).map((val) => val)`. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **Spread Operator (`...`)**: + Pros: More concise and readable code. + Cons: Can be slower due to the creation of a new array. * **Fill Method (`fill(0)`)**: + Pros: Faster execution, as it only creates an array with zeros. + Cons: Code can look more verbose. **Library Usage** There is no library used in this benchmark. The tests rely solely on standard JavaScript features. **Special JS Features/Syntax** None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's described above (spread operator and fill method). **Other Alternatives** To improve performance, developers might consider alternative approaches: 1. **Using `Array.prototype.slice()`**: Instead of using the spread operator, you can use `Array.prototype.slice()` to create a new array: `const arr = Array(10).slice().map((val) => val)`. 2. **Using `Buffer` or `TypedArray`**: For large arrays, using a typed array like `Float64Array` or `Int32Array` might be faster than using regular JavaScript arrays. 3. **Avoiding unnecessary cloning**: In some cases, you can avoid cloning the entire array by modifying the original array in place. Keep in mind that the best approach will depend on the specific requirements of your application and the characteristics of the data being processed. **Benchmark Code** The provided benchmark code consists of two test cases: `Spread Map` and `Fill Map`. The `Benchmark Definition` field for each test case includes a JavaScript snippet that creates an array with 10 elements using either the spread operator or fill method.
Related benchmarks:
Fill vs spread
Javascript string to array mapping: Array.from() vs Spread syntax [...spread]
Bench flat map vs spread reduceqwe
Array Spread vs Fill vs New Array
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?