Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Array constructor vs literal
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Array constructor - 10000 items vs Array literal - 10000 items
Created:
9 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Array constructor - 10000 items
var n = 10000; var arr = new Array(n); for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) { arr[i] = i; }
Array literal - 10000 items
var n = 10000; var arr = []; for (var i = 0; i < n; i++) { arr.push(i); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Array constructor - 10000 items
Array literal - 10000 items
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):
Let's break down what is being tested in the provided JSON. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is a simple JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches to create an array: 1. **Array constructor**: Using the `new Array()` syntax to create an empty array and then populating it with values using a loop. 2. **Array literal**: Using square brackets `[]` to create an empty array and then populating it with values using the `push()` method. **Options Compared** The two options are being compared: * **Array constructor**: This approach involves creating an empty array using `new Array(n)` and then populating it with values using a loop. * **Array literal**: This approach involves creating an empty array using square brackets `[]` and then populating it with values using the `push()` method. **Pros and Cons** * **Array constructor**: This approach can be faster because it avoids the overhead of the `push()` method, which has to search for the end of the array to add new elements. However, it also requires creating a new object and allocating memory, which can be slower in some cases. * **Array literal**: This approach is generally simpler and more concise, but it may be slower because of the overhead of the `push()` method. **Library Used** In this benchmark, there is no specific library being used. The only library that might be implicitly included is the JavaScript standard library, which provides the `Array` prototype and other built-in functionality. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. It's a straightforward comparison of two basic array creation approaches. **Other Alternatives** In terms of alternative ways to create arrays, there are a few: * **`Array.from()` method**: This method was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and allows creating an array from an iterable or an array-like object. * **`concat()` method**: This method can be used to concatenate two or more arrays, but it's not suitable for creating a new array from scratch. It's worth noting that the choice of array creation approach can depend on specific use cases and performance requirements. For example, if you need to create an array with a fixed size, using `new Array(n)` might be faster than using `[]` and `push()`. However, if you're working with dynamic data or need to concatenate multiple arrays, `Array.from()` or the spread operator (`...`) might be more suitable.
Related benchmarks:
Array constructor vs literal performance, 12345
subarray vs. constructor perf
instanceof Array vs Array.isArray
Populate array: array literal vs array constructor
new TypedArray() vs TypedArray.of()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?