Benchmark: spread vs push asfhjasdkflahsdadfasdf

Script Preparation code:

var arr = (new Array(50000)).fill(null).map((e, i) => (i));

Tests:

spread
arr = [...arr, 99]
push
arr.push(99) arr = arr

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
spread
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that contains the following information:

* `Name`: A unique name for the benchmark.
* `Description`: An optional description of the benchmark (in this case, it's empty).
* `Script Preparation Code`: The JavaScript code used to prepare the test script. In this case, it creates an array with 50,000 elements filled with null values and maps each element to its index in the array.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark has two individual test cases:

1. **`spread`**: This test case uses the spread operator (`[...arr, 99]`) to append a single element (99) to the end of the array.
2. **`push`**: This test case uses the `push()` method to add an element (99) to the end of the array and then assigns the entire array to a new variable.

**What is tested**

The benchmark is testing two approaches:

1. Using the spread operator (`[...arr, 99]`) to append an element to the end of the array.
2. Using the `push()` method to add an element to the end of the array and then reassigning the entire array to a new variable.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Spread Operator (`[...arr, 99]`)**
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and expressive syntax.
		- Creates a new array with the appended element, which can be beneficial for performance in some cases.
	+ Cons:
		- Can lead to unnecessary memory allocation and garbage collection.
		- May not be as efficient as the `push()` method in some browsers or environments.
* **`push()` Method**
	+ Pros:
		- Efficient and optimized by most JavaScript engines.
		- Does not create a new array, reducing memory allocation and garbage collection overhead.
	+ Cons:
		- Less concise syntax compared to the spread operator.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark is executed on Firefox 110 running on Windows Desktop. This specific browser and platform may have unique performance characteristics that affect the results of this benchmark.
* The `ExecutionsPerSecond` value represents the number of executions per second performed by the benchmark. A higher value indicates better performance.

**Library/External Dependencies**

In this case, no external libraries or dependencies are explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, if any JavaScript libraries were used, it would be outside the scope of this explanation.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The use of the spread operator and `push()` method is standard ECMAScript features that are widely supported by most JavaScript engines.

**Alternatives**

For similar benchmarks, you might consider exploring other approaches such as:

* Using `concat()` instead of the spread operator.
* Comparing performance with different array sizes or growth patterns.
* Testing performance under different memory constraints or garbage collection policies.

Related benchmarks:

spread vs push asfhjasdkflahsdadfasdf (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: spread vs push

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

spread

push

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):