Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
JavaScript array copy via spread op vs slice
(version: 0)
JavaScript array copy via spread operator vs slice
Comparing performance of:
Copy via spread operator vs Copy via slice
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = ['1','2','3','4','5','6','7','8']
Tests:
Copy via spread operator
[...arr]
Copy via slice
arr.slice()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Copy via spread operator
Copy via slice
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 definition and test cases to understand what is being tested. **Benchmark Definition:** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches to create a copy of an array: 1. Using the spread operator (`[...arr]`) 2. Using the `slice()` method (`arr.slice()`) This benchmark aims to measure which approach is faster and more efficient in creating an array copy. **Options Compared:** Two options are compared: a. **Copy via spread operator**: This method uses the spread operator (`[...]`) to create a new array by iterating over each element of the original array. b. **Copy via slice**: This method uses the `slice()` method to create a shallow copy of the original array. **Pros and Cons:** 1. **Copy via spread operator**: * Pros: Can be more concise and expressive in code, especially when dealing with complex data structures like objects or arrays. * Cons: May not be as efficient as other methods, especially for large datasets, since it involves creating a new array and iterating over each element. 2. **Copy via slice**: * Pros: Can be faster than the spread operator method, especially for large datasets, since it creates a shallow copy of the original array using a single function call. * Cons: May require more code to set up, as it involves calling the `slice()` method and handling edge cases like empty arrays. **Library Usage:** None of the test cases use any external libraries. The benchmark only relies on built-in JavaScript features. **Special JS Features/Syntax:** The test case uses the spread operator (`[...arr]`) which is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). This syntax allows for creating new arrays from existing iterables, making it more concise and expressive. The `slice()` method is also a built-in JavaScript function. **Other Alternatives:** For array copying, other alternatives include: * Using the `Array.prototype.copyWithin()` method (introduced in ECMAScript 2019) * Using the `Array.from()` constructor with an iterable * Using the `lodash` library's `cloneDeep()` function However, these alternatives may not be as efficient or concise as the spread operator and slice methods used in this benchmark. I hope this explanation helps software engineers understand what is being tested in the MeasureThat.net benchmark!
Related benchmarks:
Array clone from index 1 to end: spread operator vs slice
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator for Array copy
Javascript array cloning slice vs spread
Slice vs spread array
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?