Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator vs concat 2
(version: 0)
Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional slice() method
Comparing performance of:
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator vs concat
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Array.prototype.slice
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = params.slice();
spread operator
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [ ...params ]
concat
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = params.concat()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Array.prototype.slice
spread operator
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):
Let's break down the benchmark and its components. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON represents a benchmarking test for comparing three approaches to create a shallow copy of an array: 1. `Array.prototype.slice()` 2. The new ES6 spread operator (`[ ...params ]`) 3. The traditional `concat()` method (`params.concat()`) These approaches are used to compare their performance, which is likely the primary purpose of this benchmark. **Options Compared** The three options being compared have different characteristics: 1. **`Array.prototype.slice()`**: This method creates a shallow copy of an array by returning a new array object with references to the original elements. It's a widely supported and well-established method. 2. **Spread Operator (`[ ...params ]`)**: Introduced in ES6, this operator allows for creating arrays from iterable objects (like arrays or strings). In this benchmark, it's used to create a shallow copy of an array by spreading its elements into a new array. 3. **`concat()` method**: This method creates a new array object and then copies the elements from the original array into the new one. It's also widely supported but can be slower than `slice()` due to its extra step. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons for each approach: 1. **`Array.prototype.slice()`** * Pros: Fast, widely supported, and has been around for a long time. * Cons: Can be less intuitive for those new to JavaScript, as it returns a new array object with references to the original elements. 2. **Spread Operator (`[ ...params ]`)** * Pros: Concise and expressive, making it easier to read and write. Also creates an array with copies of the original elements. * Cons: May be slower than `slice()` due to its creation of a new array object. Introduced in ES6, so older browsers may not support it. 3. **`concat()` method** * Pros: Also creates an array with copies of the original elements. * Cons: Can be slower than `slice()`, and has an extra step of creating a new array object. **Library Usage** There is no library usage in this benchmark, as all three approaches are native JavaScript methods. **Special JS Features or Syntax** The spread operator (`[ ...params ]`) uses a feature introduced in ES6, which allows for creating arrays from iterable objects. This might be unfamiliar to some developers, but it's a common and useful syntax in modern JavaScript. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative approaches, consider: 1. **`Array.prototype.reduce()`**: Although not directly applicable here, `reduce()` can be used to create an array by accumulating elements from the original array. 2. **Custom implementation**: You could write your own custom function to create a shallow copy of an array, but this would likely be slower and less efficient than the native methods. In summary, the benchmark compares three approaches to create a shallow copy of an array: `Array.prototype.slice()`, spread operator (`[ ...params ]`), and traditional `concat()` method. Each has its pros and cons, with `slice()` being fast and widely supported, while the spread operator is concise but may be slower.
Related benchmarks:
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator.
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator With slightly bigger array
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator on a bigger array
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator - large array 100000
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator 73 3
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?