Benchmark: Split vs Spread (randomized)

Script Preparation code:

function generateRandomString(length) {
    const characters = 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789';
    let randomString = '';

    for (let i = 0; i < length; i++) {
        const randomIndex = Math.floor(Math.random() * characters.length);
        randomString += characters.charAt(randomIndex);
    }

    return randomString;
}

Tests:

Split
const randomString = generateRandomString(15000); const result = randomString.split("");
Spread
const randomString = generateRandomString(15000); const result = [...randomString];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Split
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.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test case consists of two individual tests: "Split" and "Spread". Both tests measure the performance difference between using the `split()` method versus spreading an array literal (`...`) to manipulate a randomly generated string.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines a function `generateRandomString(length)` that generates a random string of a given length. This function is used in both test cases.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means the benchmark only focuses on JavaScript performance and does not involve any DOM-related operations or page rendering.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case consists of two lines:

1. A line generating a random string using `generateRandomString(length)`.
2. A line splitting (or spreading) the generated string.

For example, in the "Split" test case:
```javascript
const randomString = generateRandomString(15000);
const result = randomString.split("");
```
**Libraries and Special Features**

Neither of the two tests uses any libraries or special JavaScript features beyond what's built-in to ECMAScript. No external dependencies are required, making this benchmark suitable for testing pure JavaScript performance.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare the following options:

1. **Split() method**: Splits a string into an array of substrings.
2. **Spread operator (`...`)**: Spreads an array literal into individual elements.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

**Split() Method**

Pros:

* Widely supported and well-documented in most JavaScript implementations.
* Can be used with various separators, not just whitespace.

Cons:

* Can create a new array, which might incur additional memory allocations.
* Might be slower than spreading due to the overhead of creating an array iterator.

**Spread Operator (`...`)**

Pros:

* Creates a new array without the overhead of array iterators.
* Is generally faster and more memory-efficient for large strings.

Cons:

* Requires ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) or later support.
* May have different performance characteristics on older JavaScript implementations.

**Benchmark Considerations**

When interpreting the benchmark results, keep in mind that:

* The number of executions per second is reported for each test case.
* The tests are run on a desktop platform with Chrome 116.
* There might be variations in performance depending on other factors, such as string length or other concurrent operations.

**Other Alternatives**

If you'd like to explore alternative approaches or modifications to this benchmark:

1. **Use a different separator**: Instead of using whitespace (`split("")`), try using a custom separator (e.g., `split(","")`) to see if it affects performance.
2. **Increase string length**: Experiment with longer strings (e.g., 20,000) to observe the impact on performance at scale.
3. **Test other JavaScript features**: Consider adding tests for other ECMAScript features or libraries to further evaluate JavaScript performance in different scenarios.

Remember that this benchmark focuses specifically on the `split()` method and spread operator, so modifying it extensively might alter its purpose or relevance.

Related benchmarks:

Split vs Spread (randomized) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Split vs Spread

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Split

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):