Benchmark: lodash concat test

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var a1 = ['one', 'two', 'three'];
var a2 = ['three', 'four'];

Tests:

native
var a3 = { ...a1, ...a2 }
lodash
var a3 = _.concat(a1, a2);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
native
lodash

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for concatenating arrays in JavaScript: using native syntax (`var a3 = { ...a1, ...a2 }`) versus using the Lodash library (`_.concat(a1, a2)`).

**Options Compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Native Syntax**: Using the spread operator (`...`) to concatenate arrays.
2. **Lodash Library**: The `concat` function from the Lodash library.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Native Syntax**:
	+ Pros: Native syntax is likely to be faster since it doesn't require a library call or object creation.
	+ Cons: It may not work in older browsers that don't support the spread operator.
* **Lodash Library**:
	+ Pros: Lodash is widely supported and can handle more complex concatenation scenarios (e.g., arrays with nested objects).
	+ Cons: It adds an extra library dependency, which can increase the size of the bundled code.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, the `lodash` library is used for its `concat` function. The library is included via a CDN link (`https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js`). Lodash is a popular utility library that provides a wide range of functional programming helpers, including array manipulation functions like `concat`.

**Special JS Feature**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses the Chrome 67 browser and Mac OS X 10.13.5 operating system to run the tests.
* The `ExecutionsPerSecond` metric is used to measure the performance of each test case.

**Alternatives**

If you wanted to run a similar benchmark, you could consider using other array concatenation methods or libraries, such as:

* Using the `Array.prototype.push.apply()` method instead of native syntax.
* Using a different library like Underscore.js (another popular utility library) or Moment.js (a date and time library that includes array manipulation helpers).
* Using a different browser or operating system to test the performance of these methods.

I hope this explanation helps! Let me know if you have any further questions.

Related benchmarks:

lodash concat test (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: native vs lodash

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

native

lodash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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