Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
set spread vs. generator
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
spread vs generator
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
window.setToUse1 = new Set(["a","b","c","d","e","f","g","h","i","j","k","l","m","n","o","p","q","r","s","t","u","v","w","x","y","z"]) window.setToUse2 = new Set(["a","b","c","d","e","f","g","h","i","j","k","l","m","n","o","p","q","r","s","t","u","v","w","x","y","z"]) window.setToUse3 = new Set(["a","b","c","d","e","f","g","h","i","j","k","l","m","n","o","p","q","r","s","t","u","v","w","x","y","z"])
Tests:
spread
const blarg = new Set([...setToUse1, ...setToUse2, ...setToUse3]);
generator
const blarg2 = new Set([ ...(function*() { yield* setToUse1; yield* setToUse2; yield* setToUse3; })(), ]);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
spread
generator
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
llama3.1:latest
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the benchmarking test case. **What is being tested?** The test case compares two different ways to concatenate three sets, `setToUse1`, `setToUse2`, and `setToUse3`, into a new set called `blarg` or `blarg2`. **What options are compared?** There are two test cases: 1. **Spread** (`"spread"`): This uses the spread syntax (`...`) to concatenate the three sets into a new array, which is then converted into a set using the `Set` constructor. * Code: `const blarg = new Set([...setToUse1, ...setToUse2, ...setToUse3]);` * Library/Feature: Spread syntax (`...`) 2. **Generator** (`"generator"`): This uses a generator function to iterate over the three sets and yield their elements into a new array, which is then converted into a set using the `Set` constructor. * Code: `const blarg2 = new Set([ ...(function*() { yield* setToUse1; yield* setToUse2; yield* setToUse3; })(), ]);` * Library/Feature: Generator functions (`yield`, `function*()`) **Pros and Cons** ### Spread Syntax Pros: * Easy to read and understand * Familiar syntax for many developers Cons: * May be slower than generator-based approaches, especially for large datasets * Can lead to memory issues if the concatenated array is too large ### Generator Function Pros: * Efficient for large datasets, as it avoids creating a large intermediate array * Can help prevent memory issues by yielding elements one at a time Cons: * May be less familiar or intuitive for some developers * Requires understanding of generator functions and the `yield` keyword **Other Considerations** When choosing between these approaches, consider the size of your dataset. If you're working with small to medium-sized sets, the spread syntax might be sufficient. However, if you're dealing with large datasets, using a generator function can help improve performance and prevent memory issues. **Alternatives** If you don't want to use either of these approaches, you could consider: 1. Using the `Set.prototype.add()` method to add elements one at a time: While not as efficient for large datasets, this approach is simple and easy to understand. 2. Utilizing a library like Lodash or Underscore.js, which provide various set manipulation functions. Keep in mind that these alternatives may have their own trade-offs and performance considerations.
Related benchmarks:
Updating objects w spread
Compare splicing methods
Slowest character conversion
Lodash Array isEqual vs Native
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?