Benchmark: Array splice is slow

Tests:

With Array.splice
function arrayInsert(array, index, value) { array.splice(index, 0, value); } const months = ['Jan', 'March', 'April', 'June']; arrayInsert(months, 1, 'Feb');
Tweaked version
function arrayInsert(array, index, value) { let end = array.length; while (end > index) { const previousEnd = end - 1; array[end] = array[previousEnd]; end = previousEnd; } array[index] = value; } const months = ['Jan', 'March', 'April', 'June']; arrayInsert(months, 1, 'Feb');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
With Array.splice
Tweaked version

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
With Array.splice	22601312.0 Ops/sec
Tweaked version	57614344.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**What is being tested?**

The provided benchmark tests the performance of two approaches to insert an element at a specific index in an array using the `splice()` method.

**Options compared:**

There are two test cases:

1. **"With Array.splice"`**: This approach uses the `splice()` method directly on the array.
2. **"Tweaked version"`**: This approach modifies the original array to avoid shifting elements, instead inserting at the correct index by copying elements before the insertion point.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **"With Array.splice"`**
	* Pros:
		+ Simple and intuitive implementation.
		+ Works for most cases where `splice()` is sufficient.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slow due to the overhead of searching, inserting, and shifting elements.
		+ May cause performance issues if arrays are large or frequently modified.
2. **"Tweaked version"`**
	* Pros:
		+ Can improve performance by avoiding unnecessary shifting of elements.
		+ Reduces cache misses and memory accesses.
	* Cons:
		+ More complex implementation due to manual element copying.
		+ May require more memory, especially for large arrays.

**Library usage:**

None mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some libraries (e.g., Lodash) provide optimized implementations of array methods like `splice()`, which might affect performance.

**Special JavaScript feature or syntax:**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in these benchmarks. The code follows standard JavaScript syntax and does not utilize any esoteric features.

**Other alternatives:**

1. **Using `Array.prototype.push()` instead of `splice()`**: This approach would involve inserting the element at the end of the array using `push()`, followed by shifting elements to fill the gap created by insertion.
2. **Using a more efficient data structure, like a linked list or a binary search tree**: Depending on the specific use case and requirements, alternative data structures might offer better performance for certain operations.
3. **Using native WebAssembly (WASM) implementations**: Some browsers support WASM, which can provide significant performance improvements for certain computations, including array operations.

Keep in mind that these alternatives are not necessarily applicable to this specific benchmark or common JavaScript use cases.

I hope this explanation helps you understand the benchmark and its test cases!

Related benchmarks:

Array splice is slow (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: With Array.splice vs Tweaked version

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

With Array.splice

Tweaked version

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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