Benchmark: slice vs spread operator with ints

Tests:

slice()
let params = [ 1, 5, 7 ]; let other = params.slice();
slice(0)
let params = [ 1, 5, 7 ]; let other = params.slice(0);
ES6 way
var params = [ 1, 5, 7 ]; var other = [...params]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
slice()
slice(0)
ES6 way

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'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of two ways to create a copy of an array in JavaScript: using the `slice()` method with no arguments (`slice()`) vs. the spread operator (`[...array]`).

**Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. `slice()`: Tests the performance of creating a copy of an array using the `slice()` method with no arguments.
2. `slice(0)`: Tests the performance of creating a shallow copy of an array using the `slice()` method with an argument (`slice(0)`).
3. `ES6 way` (var params = [ 1, 5, 7 ]; var other = [...params] ): Tests the performance of creating a copy of an array using the spread operator.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares three options:

* **Method 1: `slice()` with no arguments**: This method creates a new array and copies the elements from the original array to the new one.
* **Method 2: `slice(0)`**: This method creates a shallow copy of the original array by copying only the first element (index 0).
* **Method 3: ES6 spread operator (`[...array]`)**: This method creates a new array and copies the elements from the original array to the new one.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each method:

* **Method 1: `slice()` with no arguments**
	+ Pros: Generally faster than other methods, as it only needs to iterate over the array once.
	+ Cons: May not be suitable for large arrays, as it can lead to performance issues due to memory allocation and copying.
* **Method 2: `slice(0)`**
	+ Pros: Faster than the ES6 spread operator method, as it doesn't need to create a new array.
	+ Cons: Only creates a shallow copy of the original array, which may not be suitable for all use cases.
* **Method 3: ES6 spread operator (`[...array]`)**
	+ Pros: Creates a deep copy of the original array, making it more suitable for some use cases.
	+ Cons: Generally slower than other methods, as it needs to create a new array and iterate over the original one.

**Library/Features Used**

There is no library or special JavaScript feature used in this benchmark. The only notable syntax used is the ES6 spread operator (`[...array]`).

**Other Considerations**

When working with arrays in JavaScript, it's essential to consider the following:

* When creating a copy of an array, be aware that if you're using a shallow copy method (like `slice(0)`), only the first element is copied, and subsequent elements are references to the original elements.
* If you need to create a deep copy of an array, use the spread operator (`[...array]`) or consider using libraries like Lodash's `cloneDeep()` function.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for creating copies of arrays in JavaScript include:

* Using the `Array.prototype.slice.call()` method
* Using the `Array.prototype.reduce()` method to create a new array with copied elements
* Using a library like Lodash's `clone()` function

However, these methods may have varying performance characteristics and use cases compared to the methods tested in this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

slice vs spread operator with ints (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: slice() vs slice(0) vs ES6 way

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

slice()

slice(0)

ES6 way

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):