Benchmark: Spread syntax vs map

Tests:

As spread
var item = { key: '', item: 'running' }; var result = [ {...item, key: 'this'}, {...item, key: 'that'}, {...item, key: 'the other'}, ]; console.log(result);
As map
var data = ['this', 'that', 'the other']; var result = data.map(key => ({ key: key, item: 'running' })); console.log(result);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
As spread
As map

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Purpose**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: using the spread syntax (`{...item, key: 'this'}`, `{...item, key: 'that'}`, etc.) versus using the `map()` function.

**Options Compared**

There are only two options being compared:

1. **Spread Syntax**: This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a new object that includes all properties of `item` and adds additional properties.
2. **Map Function**: This approach uses the `map()` function to apply a callback function to each element in an array, creating a new array with the transformed elements.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Spread Syntax**
	* Pros:
		+ Simple and concise syntax
		+ Fast execution (since it's just a simple object creation)
	* Cons:
		+ May not be as flexible or powerful as `map()` for more complex transformations
2. **Map Function**
	* Pros:
		+ More flexible and powerful than spread syntax, especially for larger datasets or more complex transformations
	* Cons:
		+ Requires an extra function call (the callback), which may incur overhead
		+ May be slower due to the additional function call

**Library**

None in this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special feature or syntax being used in this benchmark. Both options are standard JavaScript constructs.

**Other Alternatives**

For more complex transformations, other approaches like using `reduce()` or `forEach()` might be considered. Additionally, modern JavaScript features like arrow functions and template literals might also be explored for performance optimizations.

It's worth noting that the spread syntax has become a popular choice in recent years due to its simplicity and readability, while the `map()` function remains a versatile and powerful tool for data transformations. The benchmark aims to provide insight into the performance characteristics of these two approaches on modern JavaScript engines like Chrome.

Related benchmarks:

Spread syntax vs map (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: As spread vs As map

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

As spread

As map

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):