Benchmark: Simple Array vs Array.from()

Tests:

Simple Array
[1,2,3,5,7,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,14,16,17,17,17,17,18,19,22,22,23,23,25,26,27,27,28,32,34,35,36,36,39,39,39,41,42,43,44,44,44,47,49,49,50,50,51,53,53,56,57,57,58,58,59,60,60,61,62,62,62,63,63,63,65,65,66,67,68,68,69,73,74,75,75,76,77,78,79,79,83,85,85,86,87,87,88,89,91,92,92,93,95,95,98,98,100].map(i => console.log(i))
With Array from
Array.from(Array(100)).map(i => console.log(i))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Simple Array
With Array from

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 provided JSON benchmark and its test cases to understand what is being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches for creating an array in JavaScript: using a traditional `Array` constructor versus using the `Array.from()` method. The goal of this benchmark is to determine which approach is faster.

**Options compared:**

1. **Simple Array**: Using the traditional `Array` constructor, where you pass an initial value (in this case, an empty array) and then use the `map()` function to iterate over it.
2. **With Array from**: Using the `Array.from()` method, which creates a new array by copying elements from an iterable (such as another array or string).

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

* **Simple Array**
	+ Pros:
		- More control over the initial state of the array.
		- Can be more efficient for smaller arrays since it avoids creating an intermediate array.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires more code to create the array, which can lead to slower execution times due to overhead.
		- May incur additional memory allocations and garbage collection pauses if not optimized correctly.
* **With Array from**
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and readable code.
		- Creates a new array without requiring manual allocation or initialization.
	+ Cons:
		- May incur additional overhead due to the creation of an intermediate array (if the iterable passed to `Array.from()` is large).
		- Can lead to slower execution times for larger arrays since it requires creating multiple intermediate arrays.

**Library/Functionality used:**

None explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. However, `map()` and the `Array` constructor are built-in JavaScript functions.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

The test cases use `map()` which is a common JavaScript function that applies a provided function to each element of an array.

**Benchmark preparation code and HTML preparation code:**

Since there is no specific code required for benchmark preparation, it's assumed that the provided script(s) are already executed before running the benchmark. The same goes for HTML preparation code; it's likely that some basic HTML structure (e.g., a container element) is set up to execute the scripts.

**Other alternatives:**

Some alternative approaches could be:

* Using `Array.prototype.slice()` or `Array.prototype.splice()` instead of `map()`.
* Creating an array using a more complex data structure, such as a linked list.
* Using a library like Lodash or Ramda that provides optimized array operations.
* Testing different optimization techniques, such as caching or inlining the function calls.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be directly comparable to the original Simple Array and With Array from approaches, as they might introduce additional overhead or complexity.

Related benchmarks:

Simple Array vs Array.from() (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Simple Array vs With Array from

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Simple Array

With Array from

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):