Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
es6 vs concat
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
concat vs spread
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
x = Array(10000).fill({tes:1,test:2,testss:4,nested:{test:1,doublenested:{test:"ddfdf"}}}) y = Array(10000).fill({tes:1,test:2,testss:4,nested:{test:1,doublenested:{test:"ddfdf"}}})
Tests:
concat
x.concat(y)
spread
[...x,...y]
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
concat
spread
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):
I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: concatenating arrays using the `concat()` method or spreading arrays using the spread operator (`[...x,...y]`). The test cases are identical, with 10,000 elements in each array. **Library Used** There is no specific library used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some browsers might use their own implementations of these methods under the hood. **Special JavaScript Features or Syntax** In this benchmark, the `spread` operator (`[...x,...y]`) is used, which is a relatively recent feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). This syntax allows for more concise and expressive array operations. The `concat()` method, on the other hand, is a built-in JavaScript method that has been around since the early days of JavaScript. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The script preparation code creates two large arrays, `x` and `y`, each containing 10,000 objects with nested properties. This code is executed before running the benchmark test cases. **Options Compared** Two approaches are compared: 1. **Concatenation using `concat()`**: This method appends one or more arrays to another array. 2. **Spreading arrays using `[...x,...y]`**: This syntax creates a new array by copying elements from two existing arrays. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** Here's a brief summary: * **Concatenation using `concat()`**: + Pros: Widely supported, easy to understand. + Cons: Can be slower for large arrays due to the overhead of creating intermediate arrays. * **Spreading arrays using `[...x,...y]`**: + Pros: Faster and more memory-efficient than concatenation, especially for large arrays. + Cons: Requires modern browsers that support ES6 syntax. **Benchmark Results** The latest benchmark result shows the performance metrics for each test case: 1. **Concatenation using `concat()`**: 66955.2109375 executions per second 2. **Spreading arrays using `[...x,...y]`**: 13839.228515625 executions per second As expected, the concatenation approach is significantly faster than the spreading approach. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few: * Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` to concatenate arrays. * Using `Array.prototype.push()`, `push.apply()` and `some()` together to concatenate arrays. * Using libraries like Lodash or Ramda that provide optimized array concatenation functions. Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as efficient or readable as the original approaches used in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator
Array.prototype.concat vs Spread operator
Array.prototype.concat vs Spread operator
reduce.concat() vs flat() vs concat(...)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?