Benchmark: Array.from vs Spread. But with one thousand sequential elements and with one thousand random elements from zero and one thousand.

Script Preparation code:

var fooSet = new Set();
for(var i=0;i<1000;i++) {
  fooSet.add(i);
  fooSet.add(Math.floor(Math.random() * (1000 - 0 + 1)) + 0);
}

Tests:

Array.from
var other = Array.from(fooSet);
Spread
var other = [...fooSet];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.from
Spread

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, compared options, pros and cons of those approaches, and other considerations.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark compares two ways to create an array from a Set object in JavaScript:

1. `Array.from(fooSet)`
2. `[...fooSet]` (using the spread operator)

Both methods are used to iterate over the elements of the Set object, which contains 1000 sequential and random integers.

**Options being compared:**

The two options being compared are:

* **`Array.from()`**: This method was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 as a way to create an array from an iterable or an array-like object. It uses the `ArrayConstructor` prototype to create a new array.
* **Spread operator (`[...fooSet]`)**: This syntax is used to spread the elements of the Set object into a new array.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **`Array.from()`**
	+ Pros:
		- More explicit and readable, as it clearly states its intention to create an array.
		- Less prone to errors, as it doesn't rely on the spread operator's syntax.
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower due to the additional overhead of creating a new array constructor prototype.
* **Spread operator (`[...fooSet]`)**
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and expressive, as it uses a familiar syntax for creating arrays.
		- Faster, as it doesn't require creating a new array constructor prototype.
	+ Cons:
		- May be less readable, especially for developers not familiar with the spread operator.
		- Prone to errors if not used correctly.

**Other considerations:**

* **Performance**: The benchmark results show that the spread operator is slightly faster than `Array.from()` on this specific test case.
* **Readability and maintainability**: While the spread operator may be more concise, it's also more prone to errors if not used carefully. `Array.from()`, on the other hand, is generally safer and more readable.

**Library or built-in JavaScript feature:**

Neither of these options relies on a specific library or external dependency. Both are built-in features of JavaScript.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There is no special JS feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It only uses standard JavaScript syntax for creating arrays and sets.

I hope this explanation helps software engineers understand the benchmark and its results!

Related benchmarks:

Array.from vs Spread. But with one thousand sequential elements and with one thousand random elements from zero and one thousand. (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.from vs Spread

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.from

Spread

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):