Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
nazaki3
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
FILL vs PUSH
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var n = 1000;
Tests:
FILL
var arr = new Array(n).fill("x");
PUSH
var arr = []; for (let i = 0; i < n; i++) { arr.push("x"); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
FILL
PUSH
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'd be happy to explain what's being tested in this JavaScript microbenchmark. **What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents two test cases, "FILL" and "PUSH", which measure the performance of creating an array with a specific pattern. In both cases, an array `arr` of length `n` (set to 1000 in the script preparation code) is created, but the difference lies in how the elements are added. **Options compared** There are two approaches being tested: 1. **FILL**: The first approach uses the `Array.prototype.fill()` method, which sets all elements of an array to a specified value. In this case, the value is `"x"`. 2. **PUSH**: The second approach uses a traditional for loop with `arr.push()` to add elements to the array. This involves creating an empty array and then pushing each element onto it. **Pros and Cons** 1. **FILL**: * Pros: Faster execution time, as it avoids the overhead of creating an empty array and pushing elements one by one. * Cons: May be less intuitive or more memory-intensive for some developers who are not familiar with this method. 2. **PUSH**: * Pros: More traditional and widely used approach, making it easier to understand and maintain. * Cons: Generally slower than `fill()` due to the overhead of creating an empty array and pushing elements. **Library usage** In both test cases, no libraries are explicitly mentioned or required. However, if we consider the context of JavaScript development, the `Array.prototype.fill()` method is often used in conjunction with other libraries like Lodash or jQuery. **Special JS feature or syntax** There's a notable use of the "raw" keyword in the `RawUAString` field, which seems to be related to the User Agent String format. This string represents the browser's identifier and is typically generated dynamically by browsers based on various factors like platform, version, and other attributes. **Other alternatives** If you were to rewrite these benchmarks using a different approach, some alternative methods could include: 1. **Array constructor**: Instead of `fill()` or pushing elements, you could use the array constructor (`new Array(n)`). 2. **Array.from()**: If available in your target browser, you could use `Array.from(new Array(n), () => "x")`. 3. **Loop with index**: You could also use a traditional for loop with an index variable to add elements to the array. Keep in mind that these alternatives might not produce identical results due to differences in execution time or memory usage.
Related benchmarks:
Decimal rounding
decimal.js versus native precision
toFixed vs mathjs round
Square Every Digit
Square Every Digit, but with toString()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?