Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
array[0 vs array.at(0)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
array[0] vs array.at(0)
Created:
one year ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var array = [1,2,3,4,5,6];
Tests:
array[0]
const d = array[0];
array.at(0)
const z = array.at(0);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
array[0]
array.at(0)
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome Mobile 133 on Android
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=586776" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Test name
Executions per second
array[0]
42370588.0 Ops/sec
array.at(0)
37407308.0 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is testing two different ways to access the first element of an array: using square brackets `[]` (e.g., `array[0]`) and using the `at()` method (e.g., `array.at(0)`). **Options compared** Two options are being compared: 1. **Square Brackets (`[]`)**: This is a traditional way to access an array element in JavaScript. 2. **Array.prototype.at() method**: Introduced in ECMAScript 2019, this method provides a more modern and concise way to access the first element of an array. **Pros and Cons** * **Square Brackets (`[]`)**: + Pros: Widely supported across older browsers and environments, easy to understand. + Cons: May be slower due to the need for parsing and indexing, can lead to errors if not used carefully (e.g., `array[0] === undefined`). * **Array.prototype.at() method**: + Pros: More modern and concise syntax, designed to be faster and more efficient. + Cons: Requires support for ECMAScript 2019 or later, may cause issues in older browsers. **Library usage** There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that `array.at()` is a method on the `Array.prototype`, so it leverages the built-in JavaScript array functionality. **Special JS feature/syntax** The `at()` method uses the **Symbol.atSymbol** property (e.g., ` Symbol('at')`), which is a new syntax introduced in ECMAScript 2019. This property allows the creation of unique symbol keys, including `at`. **Other alternatives** If you wanted to test other ways of accessing array elements, you could consider adding more benchmark definitions with different approaches, such as: * Using `array[0]` instead of `array.at(0)` * Using a custom function or helper library * Testing indexing arithmetic (e.g., `array[3]`) * Testing slicing syntax (e.g., `array.slice(1, 2)`) These additional test cases would help to further illustrate the performance differences between various methods and libraries in JavaScript.
Related benchmarks:
array[0] vs array.at(0)
array[1] vs array.at(1) 2
array[2] vs array.at(2)
array[index] vs array.at(index)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?