Benchmark: Arguments as array: spread vs apply

Script Preparation code:

var numbers = Array(5).fill(0).map(n=>Math.random())

Tests:

spread
var max = Math.max(...numbers); var min = Math.min(...numbers);
apply
var max = Math.max.apply(null, numbers); var min = Math.min.apply(null, numbers);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
spread
apply

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 17_4_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/17.4.1 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Mobile Safari 17 on iOS 17.4.1

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
spread	2882535.2 Ops/sec
apply	3397980.8 Ops/sec

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, compared, and considered.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures two approaches to finding the maximum and minimum values in an array of numbers: using the spread operator (`...`) versus using the `apply()` method.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates an array of 5 random numbers using the `Array(5).fill(0).map(n=>Math.random())` expression. This ensures that both test cases receive the same input data.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code, which means that the benchmark focuses solely on the JavaScript execution performance.

**Individual Test Cases**

The two test cases compare the performance of:

1. **Spread Operator (`...`)**: `var max = Math.max(...numbers);\r\nvar min = Math.min(...numbers);`
2. **Apply Method (`apply()`)**: `var max = Math.max.apply(null, numbers);\r\nvar min = Math.min.apply(null, numbers);`

**Library and Purpose**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that the use of `Math.max` and `Math.min` functions implies that JavaScript's built-in mathematical functions are being used.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The use of spread operator (`...`) is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It allows for more concise function calls, especially when dealing with arrays. In this benchmark, the spread operator is used to extract values from an array into separate arguments.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

1. **Spread Operator (`...`)**:
	* Pros: More concise and readable code.
	* Cons: May incur a performance penalty due to the additional function call overhead.
2. **Apply Method (`apply()`)**:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient, especially when dealing with large arrays or complex functions.
	* Cons: Less readable code and may require more memory allocation.

**Benchmark Results**

The latest benchmark result shows that the `apply()` method performs better in terms of executions per second (3397980.75 vs 2882535.25).

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to explore alternative approaches, you could consider:

1. Using the `reduce()` method: `var max = numbers.reduce((a, b) => Math.max(a, b));` and `var min = numbers.reduce((a, b) => Math.min(a, b));`
2. Using a simple loop: `for (var i = 0; i < numbers.length; i++) { var max = Math.max(max || -Infinity, numbers[i]); var min = Math.min(min || Infinity, numbers[i]); }`

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and code readability trade-offs.

Overall, the benchmark provides a useful comparison between two common JavaScript approaches to finding maximum and minimum values in an array.

Related benchmarks:

Arguments as array: spread vs apply (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: spread vs apply

Created: 9 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

spread

apply

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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