Benchmark: Test push vs spread

Tests:

Push
var a = ["hello", "hem"]; a.push("karan");
Spread
var a = ["hello", "hem"]; a = [...a, "karan"];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Push
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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks and analyze what's happening in this specific benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is the code that defines the test case. In this case, there are two simple JavaScript arrays being manipulated:

1. `var a = [\"hello\", \"hem\"];`
2. `a.push(\"karan\");` (for the "Push" test case)
3. `var a = [\"hello\", \"hem\"];`
4. `a = [...a, \"karan\"];` (for the "Spread" test case)

**What is tested?**

The benchmark tests two different ways to add an element to an array:

1. Using the `push()` method: This method adds a new element to the end of the array.
2. Using the spread operator (`...`): This operator creates a new array by spreading the existing elements and adding a new one.

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

* Using `push()`
* Using the spread operator (`...`)

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

**Push()**

Pros:

* More widely supported in older browsers
* Generally faster due to its simplicity

Cons:

* Can be slower for large arrays due to the need to update the array length
* May have performance issues if the array is very large or has a lot of duplicate elements

**Spread Operator (`...`)**

Pros:

* Generally faster for large arrays due to its ability to work with arrays and other iterable objects
* More concise and easier to read in many cases

Cons:

* Less widely supported in older browsers (although this is improving)
* Can be slower in some situations, such as when working with very small arrays or arrays with a lot of duplicate elements

**Library: None**

There are no external libraries being used in this benchmark.

**Special JS feature/Syntax: None**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's standard in modern JavaScript.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to compare these approaches, you might also consider using other methods, such as:

* Using `concat()` instead of `push()`
* Using `setInterval()` with a timer to add the element after a certain delay
* Using a library like Lodash or Ramda for array manipulation

Keep in mind that the performance differences between these approaches can be quite small, and the best approach will depend on your specific use case and requirements.

As for why the benchmark is using `push()` with the raw UA string, it's likely because the goal of this benchmark is to test the performance of each approach in a controlled environment. By using a consistent starting point (the original array), the benchmark can isolate the performance differences between the two approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Test push vs spread (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Push vs Spread

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Push

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):