Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
fooo1112
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
push vs arr
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
push
const columns = ['']; const questions = new Array(200); const addColumn = questions.map((_, index) => columns.push(`문제${index + 1}`));
arr
const columns = ['']; const questions = new Array(200); const addColumn = questions.map((_, index) => `문제${index + 1}`); columns.push(...addColumn);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
push
arr
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 dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore the JavaScript microbenchmarks. **What is tested?** MeasureThat.net tests the performance of different approaches to adding elements to an array in JavaScript. The benchmark measures how fast each approach can execute the code, usually measured in executions per second (EPS). In this case, we have two test cases: 1. "push" 2. "arr" **Options compared:** The "push" and "arr" options differ in how they add elements to an array. * **Push:** The `push()` method adds one or more elements to the end of an array and returns the new length of the array. * **Arr:** This option uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a copy of the `addColumn` array and then assigns it to the `columns` array using the assignment operator (`=`). The array is then added to the end of `columns`. **Pros and Cons:** Here are some pros and cons for each approach: * **Push:** * Pros: * More concise * Often faster because it's a native method with built-in support for performance optimization * Cons: * May be slower in older browsers or environments without native support * Creates a new array and copies the elements, which can lead to memory overhead * **Arr:** * Pros: * Can be faster on some platforms due to the ability to avoid creating a temporary copy of the `addColumn` array * Does not create a new array, reducing memory overhead * Cons: * More verbose and less concise than using `push()` * May not perform as well in older browsers or environments without support for the spread operator **Libraries used:** None of the benchmark definitions explicitly mention any libraries. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript implementations might rely on libraries like V8 (used by Google Chrome) or SpiderMonkey (used by Mozilla Firefox). **Special JS feature/syntax:** The "arr" option uses the spread operator (`...`), which is a relatively modern feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). This means that older browsers and environments might not support this syntax, making the "push" approach more reliable. **Other alternatives:** If you were to add another test case, some alternative approaches could include: * Using `concat()` instead of `push()`: This would involve concatenating an empty array with the result of `addColumn`, which might be slower due to the overhead of creating a new array. * Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` or other iteration methods: These methods can provide a more functional programming approach to adding elements to an array, but might introduce additional complexity and potential performance issues. In summary, MeasureThat.net provides a convenient way for developers to compare the performance of different approaches to adding elements to an array in JavaScript. By testing both the "push" and "arr" options, you can gain insight into the best approach for your specific use case and ensure optimal performance in your application.
Related benchmarks:
indexOf vs while vs for emoji
Rafa speed test 1
match vs include
match vs include vs indexOf
7894549846549843546846549844
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?