Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Concat vs forEach 1112222333345
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
concat 1111222233334 vs forEach 1111222233334
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var a = [ "id", "workspaceId", "name", "description", "snippet", "iconEmoji", "iconImage", "relationFormat", "type", "layout", "isHidden", "isArchived", "isReadonly", "isDeleted", "isFavorite", "done", "fileExt", "fileMimeType", "sizeInBytes", "restrictions" ];
Tests:
concat 1111222233334
[].concat(a);
forEach 1111222233334
var set = new Set(); a.forEach(key => set.add(key));
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
concat 1111222233334
forEach 1111222233334
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 break down what's being tested in this JavaScript microbenchmark. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is defined by two test cases: 1. `concat 1111222233334`: Tests the performance of concatenating an array using the `[]` syntax and the `concat()` method. 2. `forEach 1111222233334`: Tests the performance of iterating over an array using the `forEach()` method and adding elements to a Set object. **Options compared** In both test cases, we have two options: 1. **Concatenation**: Using the `[ ]` syntax to concatenate arrays (e.g., `var result = [a];`). 2. **ForEach iteration with Set addition**: Iterating over an array using `forEach()` and adding each element to a new Set object (e.g., `var set = new Set(); a.forEach(key => set.add(key));`). **Pros and Cons of each approach** 1. **Concatenation**: * Pros: Simple, widely supported, and often faster for small arrays. * Cons: Can be slower for large arrays due to the overhead of creating new arrays, and may lead to memory issues if not handled properly. 2. **ForEach iteration with Set addition**: * Pros: Can be more efficient for large datasets since it avoids creating new arrays, but requires a Set object which can have additional overhead. * Cons: May require extra memory allocation for the Set object, and the `forEach()` method can introduce additional overhead due to its dynamic nature. **Library/ Framework usage** Neither of these test cases uses any external libraries or frameworks. They are standard JavaScript constructs. **Special JS features/syntax (not applicable in this case)** There's no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in these test cases, as they only utilize basic language constructs. **Alternative approaches** Other alternatives for iterating over arrays and concatenating elements might include: * Using `map()` instead of `forEach()` * Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Ramda for array manipulation * Employing more advanced techniques like parallel processing or memoization For concatenation, other approaches could involve using string interpolation (`+`) or the spread operator (`...`), which are also widely supported in modern JavaScript. Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be directly comparable to the original test cases without significant modifications.
Related benchmarks:
forEach concat vs reduce push vs forEach push vs reduce concat performance test
forEach concat vs reduce push vs forEach push vs reduce concat performance test 2
benchmark: spread vs concat vs push
Concat vs forEach 11122223333456
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?