Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
javascript test slice vs spread [fedsbrd]
(version: 0)
Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional slice() method
Comparing performance of:
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Array.prototype.slice
var params = [ "hello", true, 7,1, 30, 4, 21, 100000,1, 30, 4, 21, 100000,1, 30, 4, 21, 100000,1, 30, 4, 21, 100000 ]; var other = params.slice();
spread operator
var params = [ "hello", true, 7,1, 30, 4, 21, 100000,1, 30, 4, 21, 100000,1, 30, 4, 21, 100000,1, 30, 4, 21, 100000 ]; var other = [ ...params ]
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Array.prototype.slice
spread operator
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 the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark compares two approaches for creating a shallow copy of an array: using the traditional `Array.prototype.slice()` method versus the new ES6 spread operator (`[ ...array ]`). **Options Compared** There are two options compared in this benchmark: 1. **Traditional Slice Method**: This involves calling `slice()` on the original array, which creates a new array containing a subset of elements from the original. 2. **Spread Operator**: This involves using the syntax `[ ...array ]` to create a new array by spreading the elements of the original array. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **Traditional Slice Method** * Pros: + Widely supported across older browsers and versions + Can be used in older JavaScript environments where `Array.prototype.slice()` is more likely to be supported * Cons: + Creates a new array, which can lead to increased memory usage + May not be as efficient as the spread operator for large arrays 2. **Spread Operator** * Pros: + More concise and readable code + Efficient for creating shallow copies of arrays * Cons: + Requires modern JavaScript environments (ES6+) to be supported **Library Used** There is no specific library used in this benchmark, as the test cases only involve built-in JavaScript features. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The spread operator (`[ ...array ]`) was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and allows creating a new array by spreading elements from an existing array. This syntax is not supported in older JavaScript environments. **Benchmark Preparation Code** Not applicable, as the JSON file provides the necessary information for running the benchmark. **Other Alternatives** If you need to create a shallow copy of an array, other alternatives besides the spread operator and traditional slice method include: 1. `Array.prototype.concat()`: Creates a new array by concatenating the elements of the original array with the given values. 2. `Array.prototype.slice.call()`: Similar to `slice()`, but returns an array instead of a sliced copy. 3. Third-party libraries like Lodash or Underscore.js, which provide various utility functions for working with arrays. In summary, this benchmark compares two approaches for creating shallow copies of arrays: the traditional slice method and the spread operator. The spread operator is a more modern and efficient approach, but requires modern JavaScript environments to be supported.
Related benchmarks:
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator 123
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator with length limit
arr.slice() vs spread operator
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator With slightly bigger array
Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator 73 3
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?