Benchmark: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator22

Tests:

Array.prototype.concat
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);
spread operator
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [ 1, 2, ...params ]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.concat
spread operator

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; CPU OS 15_4 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) EdgiOS/103.0.1264.77 Version/15.0 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Mobile Safari 15 on iOS 15.4

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.concat	16193862.0 Ops/sec
spread operator	358335296.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares two approaches for concatenating arrays in JavaScript: the traditional `Array.prototype.concat()` method and the new ES6 spread operator (`...`).

**Options Compared**

There are two test cases:

1. **Array.prototype.concat**: This approach uses the built-in `concat()` method to concatenate an array with another array.
2. **Spread Operator (ES6)**: This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a new array by spreading the elements of one or more arrays.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Array.prototype.concat**:
	+ Pros:
		- Widely supported across browsers and platforms.
		- Easy to read and understand for developers familiar with traditional JavaScript.
	+ Cons:
		- Can be slower than the spread operator, especially for large arrays.
		- May have additional overhead due to method calls.
* **Spread Operator (ES6)**:
	+ Pros:
		- Often faster than `concat()` because it avoids method call overhead.
		- Can be more concise and expressive in certain situations.
	+ Cons:
		- Not all browsers support the spread operator, which can lead to compatibility issues.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library used in this benchmark. However, some JavaScript engines may rely on internal libraries or optimizations that could impact performance. MeasureThat.net's benchmarking framework likely compensates for these differences by using standardized test cases and configurations.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definition. The focus is solely on comparing two common array concatenation methods.

**Other Alternatives**

For large arrays, other approaches like:

* Using `Array.prototype.push()` to add elements sequentially
* Utilizing web worker parallelization (if available)
* Employing specialized libraries for efficient array manipulation (e.g., `lodash`)

may offer better performance. However, these alternatives might not be equally compatible with all browsers and platforms.

When interpreting the benchmark results, consider the specific browser, device platform, and operating system used to execute each test case. The provided results show that the spread operator outperforms `Array.prototype.concat()` in this particular benchmark, but it's essential to evaluate performance in different contexts to ensure optimal results.

Related benchmarks:

Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator22 (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.concat

spread operator

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):