Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
spread concat merge
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
merge (jquery) vs spread vs concat prototype
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>
Tests:
merge (jquery)
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = $.merge([1, 2], params);
spread
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [ 1, 2, ...params ]
concat prototype
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
merge (jquery)
spread
concat prototype
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'd be happy to help you understand the JavaScript microbenchmarking test on MeasureThat.net. **Benchmark Definition and Script Preparation Code** The benchmark definition is a JSON object that represents three different approaches to merge or spread arrays in JavaScript: 1. `merge (jquery)`: This approach uses jQuery's `$merge` method to concatenate two arrays. 2. `spread`: This approach uses the `...` operator (also known as "spread operator") to expand an array into multiple arguments. 3. `concat prototype`: This approach uses the `Array.prototype.concat()` method to concatenate two arrays. The script preparation code is not provided, but it's implied that each test case has a separate JavaScript file or snippet that defines the variables and functions used in the benchmark. **Individual Test Cases** Each test case represents one of the three approaches mentioned above. Let's break down each test case: 1. `merge (jquery)`: * The benchmark definition uses jQuery's `$merge` method to concatenate two arrays: `[1, 2]` and `["hello", true, 7]`. * This approach is specific to jQuery and relies on the library being loaded from a CDN. 2. `spread`: * The benchmark definition uses the `...` operator (spread operator) to expand an array into multiple arguments: `[1, 2]`, `"hello"`, `true`, and `7`. * This approach is a built-in JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015. 3. `concat prototype`: * The benchmark definition uses the `Array.prototype.concat()` method to concatenate two arrays: `[1, 2]` and `["hello", true, 7]`. * This approach relies on the existence of an `Array.prototype.concat()` method. **Pros and Cons** Here's a brief overview of the pros and cons for each approach: 1. `merge (jquery)`: * Pros: Simple to implement, works with jQuery version 1.x. * Cons: Requires loading jQuery library, may not work in older browsers or environments without jQuery. 2. `spread`: * Pros: Built-in JavaScript feature, efficient, and easy to implement. * Cons: May not work in very old browsers or environments that don't support ECMAScript 2015. 3. `concat prototype`: * Pros: Widespread support across modern browsers and environments, reliable implementation. * Cons: May be slower than spread operator due to method call overhead. **Other Considerations** When evaluating the performance of these approaches, keep in mind: * Modern browsers generally have good support for ECMAScript 2015 features like the spread operator. * jQuery's `$merge` method may not be as efficient as other approaches due to its specific implementation details. * The `Array.prototype.concat()` method can be slower than using the spread operator due to method call overhead. **Other Alternatives** If you need alternative approaches for merging or spreading arrays, consider: 1. Using `Array.prototype.push()` instead of concatenation: This approach modifies the original array and can be more efficient. 2. Using a custom implementation with `for` loops: This approach can provide fine-grained control over the merge operation but may be slower than built-in methods. Keep in mind that performance optimizations should always consider the specific use case, target audience, and trade-offs between ease of implementation, maintainability, and execution speed.
Related benchmarks:
Object merge vs library merge Tomek
native reverse find vs lodash _.findLast
concat test
reverse vs lodash vs native
native reverse find vs findLast
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?