Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
concat vs lodash.concat long
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Array.prototype.concat vs Lodash concat
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
Tests:
Array.prototype.concat
var params = [ "hello", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname" ]; var other = [ "red", "wine", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname" ].concat(params);
Lodash concat
var params = [ "hello", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname" ]; var other = _.concat([ "red", "wine", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname", "hello", "sname","hello", "sname" ], params);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Array.prototype.concat
Lodash concat
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):
**Benchmark Overview** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case on the MeasureThat.net website. The benchmark compares the execution performance of two approaches: `Array.prototype.concat` and `Lodash.concat`. **Tested Approach** Both tests create an array `params` with 20 identical elements, followed by another array `other` with 20 different elements. The tests then concatenate the two arrays using: 1. **Native JavaScript**: Using the `Array.prototype.concat()` method. 2. **Lodash library**: Using the `_.concat()` function from the Lodash library. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares the execution performance of these two approaches on a desktop device running Chrome 79, with an Intel Mac OS X 10.14.6 operating system. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **Native JavaScript (`Array.prototype.concat()`)** * Pros: + Built-in functionality, no external dependencies. + Simple to use and understand. * Cons: + May have performance overhead due to the need for a function call and object lookup. 2. **Lodash library (`_.concat()` function)** * Pros: + Provides a more efficient implementation optimized for performance. + Can be useful if you frequently use concatenation operations. * Cons: + Requires an additional external dependency (the Lodash library). + May have a slight performance overhead due to the need for a function call and object lookup. **Other Considerations** In general, when choosing between these two approaches, consider the trade-off between simplicity and performance. If you prioritize ease of use and don't require extreme performance optimization, the native JavaScript approach may be sufficient. However, if you're working on a high-performance application or need to minimize overhead, the Lodash library might be a better choice. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative approaches, consider: 1. **Spread Operator (`...`)**: A more modern and concise way of concatenating arrays in JavaScript. 2. **Array.prototype.push() + Array.prototype.slice()**: Another approach that avoids function calls and object lookups. 3. **Other libraries or polyfills**: Depending on your specific use case, other libraries like `lodash-es` or polyfills might provide optimized implementations for concatenation operations. Keep in mind that the performance difference between these approaches is typically small, so it's essential to profile and benchmark your specific codebase to determine the best approach for your needs.
Related benchmarks:
Lodash _concat vs native concat
Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator vs lodash.concat - variable and constant
array find vs some vs lodash
lodash _.indexOf vs native indexOf with strings
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?