Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
includes/push vs spread
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
includes/push vs spread
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
includes/push
const a1 = [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]; const a2 = 10; if (!a1.includes(a2)) a1.push(a2);
spread
let b1 = [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]; const b2 = 10; b1 = [...b1, b2]
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
includes/push
spread
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, compared, and considered. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for adding an element to an array in JavaScript: 1. Using `includes()` method with push() 2. Using spread syntax (`...`) **Options Compared** The benchmark compares two options: a) **Using `includes()` method with push()**: This approach checks if the element exists in the array using the `includes()` method and then adds it to the end of the array using the `push()` method. b) **Using spread syntax (`...`)**: This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a new array with the existing elements and the new element, instead of modifying the original array. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: a) **Using `includes()` method with push()**: + Pros: Simple and straightforward implementation. Works well for small arrays. + Cons: May be slower for large arrays due to the overhead of checking if an element exists in the array using `includes()`. + Additional overhead: The `push()` method can shift all elements after the insertion point, which may not be desirable in some cases. b) **Using spread syntax (`...`)**: + Pros: More efficient and concise implementation. Works well for large arrays. + Cons: May have higher memory overhead due to creating a new array. Can also lead to unexpected behavior if not used carefully. **Library Usage** There is no explicit library usage in the benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript engines may optimize certain features or functions (like `includes()`), which could affect the benchmark results. **Special JS Features/Syntax** The benchmark uses a special feature: the spread syntax (`...`). This is a relatively recent addition to JavaScript and was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It allows creating new arrays from existing iterables, such as arrays or objects, using the `...` operator. **Other Alternatives** If you were to rewrite this benchmark, you might consider alternative approaches, such as: * Using `Array.prototype.push.apply()` instead of `push()`: This can be more efficient for large arrays. * Using `at()` method instead of `includes()`: This is a more modern and efficient way to check if an element exists in an array. * Using iterative approach instead of spread syntax: You could use a loop to iterate over the elements of the original array and add the new element, which might be more predictable and memory-efficient. Keep in mind that these alternatives may not provide significant performance benefits for small arrays or simple operations.
Related benchmarks:
Spread operator vs array push
Array .push() vs .unshift() vs spread
spread operator vs push Brian
Javascript: Spread vs push
zk test spread vs push
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?