Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
arguments vs spread operator
(version: 1)
Comparing performance of:
arguments vs spread operator
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
arguments
(()=>arguments.length)(0, 1, 2, 3)
spread operator
((...a)=>a.length)(0, 1, 2, 3)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
arguments
spread operator
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
9 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/18.5 Safari/605.1.15
Browser/OS:
Safari 18 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=614034" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Test name
Executions per second
arguments
86176880.0 Ops/sec
spread operator
162723504.0 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark and its test cases. **What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that tests two different approaches to accessing an array of arguments in a function: using the `arguments` object and using the spread operator (`...`). **Options compared:** 1. **Arguments object**: This approach uses the `arguments` object, which is a built-in object that contains an array-like collection of values passed to the function when it's called. 2. **Spread operator**: This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a new array from the arguments. **Pros and cons of each approach:** 1. **Arguments object**: * Pros: + More JavaScriptic way to access arguments + Might be more intuitive for developers familiar with `arguments` * Cons: + Can lead to confusion when dealing with named function arguments (e.g., `(function(x, y) { ... })(1, 2)` instead of just `(...)(1, 2)`) + Can result in slower performance due to the overhead of accessing a built-in object 2. **Spread operator**: * Pros: + More modern and expressive way to access arguments + Allows for better code readability and maintainability * Cons: + Might be less familiar to developers without experience with newer JavaScript features **Library and syntax:** There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some browsers may have additional optimizations or special cases for certain libraries or frameworks. **Special JS feature or syntax:** None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's common in modern JavaScript development. The focus is on comparing two simple approaches to accessing arguments in a function. **Other alternatives:** To measure and compare different approaches to accessing arguments, you might consider including additional test cases, such as: * Using `Array.prototype.slice()` to create an array from the arguments * Using `function` syntax with named arguments (e.g., `(function(x, y) { ... })(1, 2)` instead of just `(...)(1, 2)`) * Using a library like Lodash or Ramda for functional programming utilities Keep in mind that these additional alternatives might not be as relevant to the specific question being asked in this benchmark. The current test cases provide a clear comparison between using the `arguments` object and the spread operator. I hope this explanation helps! Let me know if you have any further questions or need clarification on any of the points mentioned above.
Related benchmarks:
spread operator vs push test
spread operator vs push test - correct
arr.slice() vs spread operator
spread operator vs push Brian
Array .push() vs spread operator
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?