Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
concat() vs flat()
(version: 0)
Compare concat() and flat() methods
Comparing performance of:
Array.prototype.concat vs Array.prototype.flat
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var params = [[ 1, 2 ], [ "hello", true, 7 ], [ "fear", "not" ]];
Tests:
Array.prototype.concat
var other = params[0].concat(params[1], params[2]);
Array.prototype.flat
var other = params.flat();
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Array.prototype.concat
Array.prototype.flat
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 definition and test cases to understand what's being tested. **What is being tested:** The benchmark compares the performance of two methods in JavaScript: `concat()` and `flat()`. These methods are part of the Array prototype, which means they're used on arrays (ordered collections of values). **Options compared:** 1. **Array.prototype.concat()**: This method returns a new array that is a shallow copy of one or more arrays. It takes an arbitrary number of arguments. 2. **Array.prototype.flat()**: This method flattens an array (which can be deeply nested) into a one-dimensional array. **Pros and Cons:** * **concat():** + Pros: - Simple to understand and implement. - Works well for concatenating arrays with similar types of elements. + Cons: - Can create new objects if the input arrays contain objects, which can be memory-intensive. - Not suitable for flattening deeply nested arrays. * **flat():** + Pros: - More efficient than concat() when dealing with large arrays or deep nesting. - Reduces memory allocation by creating a single-level array. + Cons: - Can be slower due to its recursive nature (it uses heappop and push operations). - Not as intuitive for non-developers. **Library usage:** None mentioned in the benchmark definition. Both `concat()` and `flat()` are built-in JavaScript methods, so no external libraries are required. **Special JS feature or syntax:** * **Spread syntax (`...`)** is not used in this benchmark. * However, it's worth noting that `flat()` was introduced in ECMAScript 2019 (ES10), which may affect its behavior and performance in older browsers or environments that don't support the latest standards. **Other alternatives:** If you need to flatten arrays or concatenate them, other methods can be used: * For concatenation: + Use `Array.prototype.push()` to append elements from one array to another. + Use a library like Lodash (`_.concat()`) if you prefer a more concise solution. * For flattening arrays: + Use `Array.prototype.reduce()` with a callback function to recursively flatten the array. + Use a library like Lodash (`_.flatten()`) for a more efficient and concise implementation. Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and use cases compared to `concat()` and `flat()`.
Related benchmarks:
[].concat() vs flat()
asdf concat() vs flat()
concat(spreadOp) vs flat()
flat() vs reduce/concat()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?