Benchmark: test11 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:


<div id=''></div>

Script Preparation code:

var arr = Array(100).fill([{n: ''}]);
var arr2 = Array(100).fill([{n: ''}]);

Tests:

concat
arr.concat(arr2);
push
arr.push(...arr2);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
concat
push

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 break down what's being tested on the provided JSON.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing two operations: `arr.concat(arr2)` and `arr.push(...arr2)`. These are two common methods used in JavaScript to concatenate or append elements to an array.

**Options Compared**

Two approaches are compared:

1. **`concat()`**: This method creates a new array and copies all elements from the original array (`arr`) and the second array (`arr2`). It then returns this new concatenated array.
2. **`push()` with spread operator (`...`)**: This approach uses the `push()` method to append elements from the second array (`arr2`) to the end of the original array (`arr`). The spread operator (`...`) is used to unpack the elements of the second array.

**Pros and Cons**

**`concat()`**:

Pros:

* Creates a new array, which can be beneficial for performance in some cases.
* Less memory allocation overhead compared to using `push()` with an array and then spreading it back into an array.

Cons:

* Creates a new array, which can lead to increased memory usage and slower execution times due to the overhead of creating a new array object.
* Can be slower than using `push()` with spread operator in some cases, depending on the browser and hardware.

**`push()` with spread operator (`...`)**:

Pros:

* Modifies the original array in place, reducing memory allocation overhead.
* May be faster than using `concat()`, especially for large arrays or performance-critical code.

Cons:

* Can lead to slower execution times if the original array is large and needs to be resized frequently.
* May cause issues with browser caching and other optimizations that rely on the original array's size and structure.

**Library and Special JS Features**

In this benchmark, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, JavaScript features like `const` and `let` (not used in this example) are implicitly required to define variables like `arr` and `arr2`.

**Other Considerations**

1. **Array caching**: Browsers may optimize array operations by caching intermediate results or using optimized implementations for common array methods.
2. **Memory allocation overhead**: The benchmark may not accurately reflect memory allocation overhead, which can vary depending on the browser and hardware.
3. **Optimizations and inlining**: Modern browsers often apply optimizations and inlining to array operations, which can affect performance and accuracy of benchmarks.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for concatenating or appending elements to an array include:

1. `Array.prototype.slice()`: Returns a new array with a subset of the original array's elements.
2. `Array.prototype.reduce()`: Accumulates elements from two arrays using a callback function.
3. `Array.prototype splice()`: Modifies the original array by inserting, shifting, or deleting elements.

These alternatives may have different performance characteristics and requirements depending on the specific use case and browser optimizations.

Related benchmarks:

test11 (version: 0)

test

Comparing performance of: concat vs push

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

concat

push

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):