Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
string concat + join vs unshift + join
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
string concat + join vs unshift + join
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var el = 'test'; var arr = ['foo', 'bar'];
Tests:
string concat + join
el + arr.join(',')
unshift + join
arr.unshift(el); arr.join(',');
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
string concat + join
unshift + join
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 years ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:124.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/124.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 124 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=516052" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
string concat + join
42.0M/s
unshift + join
6K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
string concat + join
42,014,636 Ops/sec
unshift + join
5,546 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided JSON and benchmark results to understand what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is comparing two ways of concatenating strings in JavaScript: 1. Using the `+` operator for string concatenation (`el + arr.join(',')`) 2. Using the `unshift()` method followed by the `join()` method on an array (`arr.unshift(el) && arr.join(',')`) **Options Compared** The benchmark is comparing these two approaches because they are commonly used in JavaScript development and have different performance characteristics. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach:** 1. **String concatenation using `+` operator:** * Pros: + Easy to read and understand + Fewer lines of code * Cons: + Can lead to slower performance due to the creation of temporary strings 2. **Using `unshift()` followed by `join()`:** * Pros: + Can be faster because it avoids creating temporary strings + More flexible, as it allows for adding elements to an array before concatenating * Cons: + Can lead to more complex code if not used carefully **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on the comparison of two common string concatenation approaches. **Library Used** None of the provided benchmarks use a specific library. **Other Considerations** When writing benchmarks, it's essential to consider factors like: * Data size: How large are the strings and arrays involved? * Browser support: Are there any browser-specific optimizations or quirks that might affect performance? * Platform: Is this benchmark running on desktop, mobile, or another platform? **Alternatives** Other alternatives for string concatenation in JavaScript include: 1. Using `template literals` (introduced in ES6): This method is more efficient and readable than the `+` operator approach. 2. Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` to concatenate strings: This method avoids creating temporary strings and can be more concise. ```javascript // Template literal example const result = `${el} ${arr.join(',')}`; // Array.prototype.reduce() example const arr = ['foo', 'bar']; const result = arr.reduce((acc, curr) => acc + curr); ``` Keep in mind that the choice of concatenation method depends on your specific use case and performance requirements.
Related benchmarks
array join vs toString js
Concat() vs. Unshift()
string concat + join vs unshift + join (2)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?