Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Concat performance: Array vs Object vs Set
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Array Concat vs Object Concat vs Concat set
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var baseArray = Array.from(Array(4).keys()).map(key => 'some-big-ass-string.' + (key + 1)); var baseObject = baseArray.reduce((accumulator, currentItem) => ({ ...accumulator, [currentItem]: true })); var arraySet = new Set(baseArray);
Tests:
Array Concat
const test = Array.concat.apply([], [baseArray, baseArray, baseArray, baseArray]);
Object Concat
const test = {...baseArray, ...baseArray, ...baseArray, ...baseArray};
Concat set
const test = new Set([baseArray, baseArray, baseArray, baseArray]);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Array Concat
Object Concat
Concat set
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark, "Concat performance: Array vs Object vs Set", tests the performance of three different data structures in JavaScript: arrays, objects, and sets. The goal is to determine which data structure performs best when concatenating elements. **Test Cases** There are three test cases: 1. **Array Concat**: This test case uses the `Array.concat()` method to concatenate four instances of the `baseArray` array. 2. **Object Concat**: This test case uses the spread operator (`...`) to concatenate four instances of the `baseArray` array as separate objects. 3. **Concat Set**: This test case uses a `Set` data structure to store the concatenated elements, where each element is an instance of the `baseArray` array. **Library and Features** The benchmark includes the use of the Lodash library, which provides utility functions for JavaScript development. Specifically, it uses the `reduce()` method to create an object with properties set to `true`, and the spread operator (`...`) to concatenate objects. **Test Results** The latest benchmark results show the performance of each test case on a Firefox 61 browser running on a Mac OS X 10.13 device: 1. **Array Concat**: With over 1,633 executions per second. 2. **Concat Set**: With approximately 679 executions per second. 3. **Object Concat**: With around 158 executions per second. **Comparison of Approaches** The three approaches have different pros and cons: * **Array Concat**: This approach is simple to implement and performant, as it uses a built-in method optimized for performance. However, it may not be suitable for all use cases, as it assumes the array elements are identical. * **Object Concat**: This approach uses the spread operator, which can be less efficient than concatenating arrays using `Array.concat()`. However, it provides more flexibility and allows for easier manipulation of objects. Additionally, this approach avoids creating a new array with each iteration. * **Concat Set**: Using a set data structure can provide good performance for certain use cases, such as when concatenating unique elements or removing duplicates. However, sets are not designed for consecutive element concatenation and may require additional logic to achieve the desired result. **Considerations** When choosing an approach for concatenating arrays, consider the following factors: * Performance: If performance is critical, `Array.concat()` might be the best choice. * Flexibility: Using objects with the spread operator provides more flexibility and makes it easier to manipulate the concatenated elements. * Unique elements: When concatenating unique elements, using a set data structure can provide better performance. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for concatenating arrays include: * `Array.prototype.push()`: This approach involves appending each element to the end of the array, which can be less efficient than other methods. * Custom implementation: Writing a custom loop to concatenate the elements can also be an option.
Related benchmarks:
Array.prototype.map vs Lodash map
Array.prototype.forEach vs Lodash forEach
lodash vs for-of vs forEach vs map v2
native map vs lodash map on large array
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?