Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Math.min.apply vs Spread
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Math.min.apply vs Spread
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = [14, 58, 20, 77, 66, 82, 42, 67, 42, 4]
Tests:
Math.min.apply
const min = Math.min.apply(Math, arr)
Spread
const min = Math.min(...arr)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Math.min.apply
Spread
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one month ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:149.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/149.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 149 on Mac OS X 10.15
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
Math.min.apply
226757376.0 Ops/sec
Spread
78658880.0 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into explaining the benchmark and its results. **What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches to find the minimum value in an array: `Math.min.apply()` and the spread operator (`...`). The test cases are designed to measure the performance of these two methods on a specific input array `[14, 58, 20, 77, 66, 82, 42, 67, 42, 4]`. **Options being compared:** There are two options being compared: 1. **`Math.min.apply()`**: This method applies the `Math.min()` function to an array, using the `apply()` method to call it with the context set to the `Math` object. 2. **Spread operator (`...`)**: This approach uses the spread operator to pass the elements of the input array to the `Math.min()` function. **Pros and Cons:** * **`Math.min.apply()`**: + Pros: This method is widely supported across browsers and Node.js versions, as it's a standard part of the JavaScript API. It also provides more control over the context in which the function is called. + Cons: The use of `apply()` can add overhead due to the additional function call, making this approach potentially slower than the spread operator. * **Spread operator (`...`)**: + Pros: This method is a more modern and concise way to pass arguments to functions. It's also faster than using `apply()`, as it avoids an extra function call. + Cons: The spread operator was introduced in ECMAScript 2015, so older browsers or environments might not support it. **Library usage:** There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that both methods rely on the `Math` object, which is a built-in JavaScript object. **Special JS feature or syntax:** The spread operator (`...`) was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and provides a concise way to pass elements of an array as separate arguments to functions. This syntax was not available in older versions of JavaScript. **Benchmark preparation code:** The script preparation code is `var arr = [14, 58, 20, 77, 66, 82, 42, 67, 42, 4]`, which creates a sample array for the benchmark. **Alternative approaches:** There are other ways to find the minimum value in an array: * Using `Math.min()` without any additional arguments (which is not applicable here, as we're comparing two methods). * Implementing the min function manually using a loop or recursion. * Using libraries like Lodash, which provides a `min` function. However, these alternatives might not be as efficient or concise as the spread operator method used in this benchmark. I hope this explanation helps you understand the benchmark and its results!
Related benchmarks:
Spread vs. Apply
Array: spread operator vs push #2
Array push an element vs spread (fixed)
Push vs Spread JavaScript
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?