Benchmark: Test push, spread, concat

Script Preparation code:

let first = [];
let second = [];
for (var i; i < 100; i++) {
  first.push(i);
  second.push(i);
}

Tests:

push
let first = []; let second = []; for (var i; i < 100; i++) { first.push(i); second.push(i); } first.push(...second);
concat
let first = []; let second = []; for (var i; i < 100; i++) { first.push(i); second.push(i); } first = first.concat(second);
spread
let first = []; let second = []; for (var i; i < 100; i++) { first.push(i); second.push(i); } first = [...first, ...second];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
push
concat
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

The provided benchmark measures the performance of three different approaches to perform array operations in JavaScript:

1. **Push**: This approach uses the `push` method to add elements to an array. It's a simple and straightforward way to append new elements to an existing array.
2. **Concat**: This approach uses the `concat` method to concatenate two arrays into one. It creates a new array by copying all elements from both input arrays.
3. **Spread**: This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a new array by spreading the elements of another array.

These three approaches are being compared to determine which is the fastest for large datasets.

**Options comparison**

The pros and cons of each approach are:

* **Push**:
	+ Pros: Simple, fast, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: Creates a new array reference every time `push` is called, which can lead to increased memory usage and garbage collection overhead.
* **Concat**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster than push for large datasets since it only creates one new array.
	+ Cons: Creates a temporary array during the concatenation process, which can increase memory usage.
* **Spread**:
	+ Pros: Fast and efficient way to create a new array by spreading elements from another array.
	+ Cons: Requires JavaScript versions that support the spread operator (ECMAScript 2015 and later).

**Library consideration**

None of the benchmark test cases use any external libraries.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

The benchmark uses the spread operator (`...`) which is a relatively new feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015. This feature allows elements to be "spread" into an existing array, creating a new array with those elements.

**Other alternatives**

There are other ways to achieve similar results as the three approaches being compared:

* **Array.prototype.reduce()**: Instead of using `push`, you can use `reduce` to accumulate elements in an array.
* **Array.prototype.fill() + Array.prototype.concat()**: You can fill an array with a specific value and then concatenate it with another array.

However, these alternatives might not be as efficient or straightforward as the original three approaches being compared.

Related benchmarks:

Test push, spread, concat (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: push vs concat vs spread

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

push

concat

spread

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):