Benchmark: Spread vs concat array v1000

Tests:

Spread
const params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] const result = [ 1, 2, ...params ]
Concat
const params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; const result = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Spread
Concat

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 JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of different approaches.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark compares two ways to merge an array with another array using the spread operator (`...`) versus the `concat()` method. The test case uses a simple array `[ "hello", true, 7 ]` as the source array.

**Options compared:**

1. **Spread operator (`...`)**:
	* Syntax: `const result = [ ...params ];`
	* Description: This syntax creates a new array by spreading the elements of `params` into the existing array `[1, 2]`.
	* Pros:
		+ More concise and expressive.
		+ Can be used to create arrays with additional spread values.
	* Cons:
		+ May have performance implications due to the creation of a new array.
2. **`concat()` method**:
	* Syntax: `const result = [1, 2].concat(params);`
	* Description: This syntax creates a new array by concatenating the elements of `[1, 2]` with the elements of `params`.
	* Pros:
		+ Established and widely supported.
		+ Can be used to create arrays with additional methods (e.g., `slice()`, `filter()`).
	* Cons:
		+ Less concise than the spread operator syntax.

**Other considerations:**

* **Performance:** The benchmark measures the number of executions per second, which indicates performance. In this case, both options are likely to be relatively fast.
* **Readability and maintainability:** The spread operator syntax is generally considered more readable and maintainable due to its conciseness and expressiveness.

**Library or special JavaScript feature:**

There are no libraries used in these test cases. However, the `...` operator is a special syntax introduced in ECMAScript 2018 (ES2018) as part of the spread operator feature.

**Additional notes:**

* If you were to modify the test case to use `Array.prototype.push()` instead of spread or concat, it would not change the fundamental comparison between these two methods.
* If you wanted to explore other merge strategies, such as using `Array.prototype.splice()`, `Array.prototype.unshift()`, or other libraries like Lodash's `merge()` function, it could be interesting to see how those compare in terms of performance and readability.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives for merging arrays include:

* Using the `set()` method (for creating a set from an array)
* Using the `reduce()` method (for creating an array from an iterable)
* Using a library like Lodash's `merge()` function
* Using a custom implementation, such as using `Array.prototype.push()` or `Array.prototype.splice()`

These alternatives would likely have different performance characteristics and readability trade-offs compared to the spread operator and `concat()` methods.

Related benchmarks:

Spread vs concat array v1000 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Spread vs Concat

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Spread

Concat

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):