Benchmark: array concat x array spread

Tests:

concat
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);
spread
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [ 1, 2, ...params ]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
concat
spread

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 123 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
concat	17242998.0 Ops/sec
spread	58146512.0 Ops/sec

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 Definition:**

The benchmark is testing two approaches to concatenate arrays in JavaScript:

1. Using the `concat()` method:
```javascript
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ];
var other = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);
```
2. Using the spread operator (`...`):
```javascript
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ];
var other = [ 1, 2, ...params ];
```
**Options being compared:**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches:

* `concat()`: The traditional way of concatenating arrays in JavaScript.
* Spread operator (`...`): A newer syntax introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) that allows for more concise array concatenation.

**Pros and Cons:**

**Concat() Method:**

Pros:

* Wide support across browsers and older versions of JavaScript engines.
* Well-established and widely used syntax.

Cons:

* Can be slower due to the need to create a new array and copy the elements from the original arrays.
* May not perform as well on large datasets.

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

Pros:

* Faster execution time, as it avoids creating a new array and copying elements.
* More concise syntax, making it easier to read and write.

Cons:

* Requires support for ES6 and later versions of JavaScript engines. Older browsers may not execute this code correctly or at all.
* May have issues with certain browser implementations or extensions.

**Library usage:**

None of the benchmark cases use any external libraries. The focus is solely on testing the two different array concatenation approaches in vanilla JavaScript.

**Special JS features or syntax:**

The spread operator (`...`) is a relatively new feature introduced in ES6, so it's worth noting that not all browsers support it natively. However, most modern browsers, including Chrome, do support this feature.

**Other alternatives:**

There are other approaches to concatenate arrays in JavaScript, such as using `Array.prototype.push()` or `Array.prototype.splice()`. However, these methods are not tested in this benchmark case.

It's worth noting that the benchmark results show that the spread operator (`...`) is slightly faster than the traditional `concat()` method in this specific test case. This may vary depending on the specific use case and JavaScript engine implementation.

Related benchmarks:

array concat x array spread (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: concat vs spread

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

concat

spread

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):