Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
flat-vs-concat
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
flat vs concat
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
window.arr = Array(10000).fill(0).map(x => { const rnd = Math.random(); x = rnd * 1e5 | 0; return rnd > 0.5 ? x : [x]; });
Tests:
flat
arr.slice().flat();
concat
Array.prototype.concat.apply([], arr.slice());
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
flat
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 provided JSON and benchmarking code to understand what is being tested and the pros and cons of different approaches. **Benchmark Definition JSON** The `Name` field represents the name of the benchmark, which in this case is "flat-vs-concat". The `Description` field is empty, likely because no description was provided for this benchmark. The `Script Preparation Code` section contains a JavaScript code snippet that creates an array `arr` with 10,000 elements. Each element has two possible values: either the number itself or an array containing the same value (if the random number generated is greater than 0.5). This creates a situation where using `Array.prototype.flat()` would return an array of numbers, while using `Array.prototype.concat.apply([], arr.slice())` would return an array with arrays. The `Html Preparation Code` section is empty, indicating that no HTML-related setup is needed for this benchmark. **Individual Test Cases** There are two test cases: 1. **flat**: This test case measures the execution time of calling `arr.slice().flat()`. 2. **concat**: This test case measures the execution time of calling `Array.prototype.concat.apply([], arr.slice())`. **Pros and Cons of Different Approaches** Both approaches have their advantages and disadvantages: * **Using `Array.prototype.flat()`**: + Pros: Returns a flat array with no nested arrays, which might be desirable in some cases. + Cons: May incur additional overhead due to the need to recursively flatten the array. * **Using `Array.prototype.concat.apply([], arr.slice())`**: + Pros: Allows for more control over the resulting structure of the array (in this case, creating an array with arrays). + Cons: Can be slower than using `flat()` because it requires concatenating all elements. **Library Usage** There is no explicit library mentioned in the code. However, `Array.prototype.flat()` and `Array.prototype.concat()` are built-in methods of the JavaScript Array prototype. **Special JS Features/Syntax** There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmarking code. The focus is on measuring the performance difference between two specific array manipulation techniques. **Other Alternatives** If you wanted to test other approaches, here are a few alternatives: * Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` instead of `concat()`. * Using a custom implementation for flattening arrays (e.g., using recursion or iteration). * Comparing the performance of different array data structures (e.g., using `Uint8Array` instead of `Number[]`). Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as straightforward to implement or compare, and may require additional consideration of factors like memory usage and cache efficiency.
Related benchmarks:
Fill array with random integers
Flatten Array of Arrays
flat-vs-concat-5k
Array.from VS spreading for
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?