Benchmark: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator vs Array.prototype.push spread

Tests:

Array.prototype.concat
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);
spread operator
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [ 1, 2, ...params ]
push
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [ 1, 2 ].push(...params)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.concat
spread operator
push

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.

I'd be happy to explain the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test compares the performance of three different approaches for merging arrays in JavaScript:

1. `Array.prototype.concat()`
2. The new ES6 spread operator (`...`)
3. `Array.prototype.push()` with a spread syntax (`...`)

**Options Compared**

* `concat()`: The traditional method for concatenating arrays using the `+` operator.
* Spread Operator (`...`): A new feature introduced in ES6 that allows spreading array elements into a new array.
* `push()` with Spread Syntax (`...`): Using the spread operator to pass an array as a single argument to `Array.prototype.push()`, which then pushes all its elements onto the existing array.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. `concat()`
	* Pros: Simple, widely supported, and well-documented.
	* Cons: Creates a new array and copies all elements, resulting in performance overhead.
2. Spread Operator (`...`)
	* Pros: More concise and efficient than `concat()` since it only copies the necessary elements.
	* Cons: Requires modern browsers to support ES6 syntax and may not work in older environments.
3. `push()` with Spread Syntax (`...`)
	* Pros: Similar performance benefits to the spread operator, but still more readable than using `concat()`.
	* Cons: Requires a minor syntax change from traditional `Array.prototype.push()` usage.

**Library Usage**

There is no specific library used in this benchmark, as it only involves native JavaScript features.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark utilizes the ES6 spread operator (`...`) and modern syntax, which may not be supported in older browsers. If you need to test in older environments, you might want to consider adding additional parameters to the script preparation code or using alternative implementations that provide compatibility with older browsers.

**Other Alternatives**

If you'd like to compare other array merging techniques, here are some alternatives:

1. `Array.prototype.set()`: This method is not commonly used for array concatenation but could be an interesting comparison.
2. `Array.prototype.slice().concat()`: A more explicit approach that uses `slice()` to create a new array before concatenating with the original array.
3. Using `for` loops or other iteration methods, such as `forEach()` or `map()`, for merging arrays.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as straightforward or efficient as using native JavaScript features like spread operators and `push()` with spread syntax.

Related benchmarks:

Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator vs Array.prototype.push spread (version: 0)

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

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator vs push

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.concat

spread operator

push

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):