Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
flat-vs-concat-5k
(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(5000).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 benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** MeasureThat.net is testing two JavaScript functions: `arr.slice().flat()` (test case "flat") and `Array.prototype.concat.apply([], arr.slice())` (test case "concat"). The goal is to compare their performance, specifically execution speed, on a large array of 5,000 elements. **Options Compared** The two options being compared are: 1. **Flat Method**: Uses the `slice()` method followed by the `flat()` method to flatten the array. 2. **Concat Method**: Uses the `concat()` method with `apply()` to concatenate the array into a single element. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach:** **Flat Method (arr.slice().flat())** Pros: * More efficient, as it avoids creating intermediate arrays. * Often preferred for conciseness and readability. Cons: * Requires modern browsers that support the `flat()` method ( introduced in ES6). * May be slower on older browsers or in environments with limited memory. **Concat Method (Array.prototype.concat.apply([], arr.slice()))** Pros: * Works in older browsers and environments, as it uses a standard array method. * May be faster on older hardware due to its simplicity. Cons: * Creates intermediate arrays, which can lead to higher memory usage. * Often considered less readable than the flat method. **Other Considerations:** * The benchmark tests only two specific methods. Other approaches, like using `Array.prototype.reduce()` or `Array.prototype.every()`, may also be viable alternatives. * Modern browsers and environments tend to support more efficient array manipulation techniques, such as the `flat()` method. * The test environment specified is a desktop browser (Safari 15), which might impact results. Other platforms, like mobile devices or Node.js, could yield different performance characteristics. **Libraries Used:** None mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. **Special JS Features/Syntax:** The flat method uses modern JavaScript syntax introduced in ES6, specifically the `flat()` method and template literals (`\r\n\t`). For those without a deep knowledge of JavaScript, it's worth noting that this code is using a feature called "template literals," which allows for more readable string concatenation. The `\r\n\t` part is equivalent to writing multiple lines of code with newline characters (\n) and indentation ( \t).
Related benchmarks:
Fill array with random integers
Flatten Array of Arrays
flat-vs-concat
Array.from VS spreading for
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?