Benchmark: foreach vs spread operator 2

Tests:

forEach
var a = {'1': 1, '2': 2, '3': 3, '4': 4} var b = [{id: 5}, {id: 6}, {id: 7}, {id: 8}] b.forEach(x => { a[x.id] = x })
spread operator
var a = {'1': 1, '2': 2, '3': 3, '4': 4} var b = [{id: 5}, {id: 6}, {id: 7}, {id: 8}] a = {...a, ...b.reduce((obj, item) => { obj[item.id]; return obj }, {})}

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 19 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 19 runs

forEach

46.2M/s

spread operator

26.3M/s

Fastest: forEach (1.8x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ forEach: 46,222,144 ops/sec
• spread operator: 26,313,332 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
forEach
spread operator

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/136.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 136 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

forEach

70.2M/s

spread operator

31.7M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ forEach	70,159,248 Ops/sec
spread operator	31,698,078 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help explain the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: using the traditional `concat()` method and the new ES6 spread operator (`...`) for array merging.

**Options being compared:**

1. **Traditional Concat Method**: This approach uses the `concat()` method to merge two arrays.
```javascript
var b = [{id: 5}, {id: 6}, {id: 7}, {id: 8}];
a = a.concat(b);
```
2. **Spread Operator (`...`)**: This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to merge two objects (in this case, arrays).
```javascript
var b = [{id: 5}, {id: 6}, {id: 7}, {id: 8}];
a = {...a, ...b};
```
**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Traditional Concat Method**
	* Pros:
		+ Widely supported in older browsers.
		+ Can be easier to understand for some developers.
	* Cons:
		+ Can lead to performance issues due to the creation of a new array.
		+ May not be as efficient as other methods, especially for large arrays.
2. **Spread Operator (`...`)**
	* Pros:
		+ More concise and expressive than traditional concat method.
		+ Can lead to better performance, especially when working with objects.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires support for ES6 spread operator in older browsers (not supported).
		+ May not be as widely understood by developers.

**Library used:**

In the benchmark definition, `reduce()` is used in one of the test cases. `reduce()` is a method that applies a function to each element of an array and reduces it to a single value.

```javascript
a = {...a, ...b.reduce((obj, item) => { obj[item.id]; return obj }, {})}
```
In this case, the `reduce()` method is used to merge the two arrays into a new object. The function passed to `reduce()` takes an accumulator (`obj`) and an element from the array (`item`), and updates the accumulator by adding the `id` property of the item.

**Special JS feature/syntax:**

In this benchmark, no special JavaScript features or syntax are used beyond ES6 spread operator.

**Other alternatives:**

For merging arrays or objects, other alternatives to the traditional concat method and spread operator include:

1. **Array.prototype.slice() and Array.prototype.push():**
```javascript
var b = [{id: 5}, {id: 6}, {id: 7}, {id: 8}];
a = a.concat(b);
// Later...
a.push(...b);
```
2. **Array.prototype.set():** (not supported in older browsers)
```javascript
var b = [{id: 5}, {id: 6}, {id: 7}, {id: 8}];
a.set(0, a[0]); // Set the first element of `a` to the first element of `b`
// Later...
for (let i = 0; i < b.length; i++) {
    a[i] = b[i];
}
```
3. **Underscore.js library:** (not part of the benchmark definition)
```javascript
_ = _.extend({}, a, b);
```
Note that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and usage patterns compared to the traditional concat method and spread operator.

foreach vs spread operator 2 (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: `forEach vs spread operator`

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

forEach

spread operator

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 19 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 19 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

foreach vs spread operator 2 (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: forEach vs spread operator

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

forEach

spread operator

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 19 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 19 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `forEach vs spread operator`