Benchmark: concat vs push1 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src=''></script>

Script Preparation code:

var arr1 = Array(100).fill([{n: ''}]);
var arr2 = Array(100).fill([{n: ''}]);

Tests:

concat
arr1 = arr1.concat(arr2)
push
arr1.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.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark created on the MeasureThat.net website. The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: concatenating arrays using the `concat()` method and pushing elements onto an array using the `push()` method.

**Test Case 1: Concatenation**

The first test case uses the following script preparation code:
```javascript
var arr1 = Array(100).fill([{n: ''}]);
var arr2 = Array(100).fill([{n: ''}]);
```
This creates two arrays, `arr1` and `arr2`, each with 100 elements. The purpose of this array creation is to serve as the input data for the benchmark.

**Test Case 2: Push**

The second test case uses the following script preparation code:
```javascript
var arr1 = Array(100).fill([{n: ''}]);
var arr2 = Array(100).fill([{n: ''}]);
```
This is identical to the first test case. The purpose of this array creation is also to serve as the input data for the benchmark.

**Benchmark Comparison**

The two test cases compare the performance of concatenating `arr1` and `arr2` using the `concat()` method versus pushing elements from `arr2` onto `arr1` using the `push()` method. The benchmark measures the execution time for each approach.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Concatenation**: Using the `concat()` method to concatenate two arrays.
	* Pros: This approach creates a new array and assigns it to the original array, which can be faster for large datasets due to the use of optimized JavaScript engines' copying algorithms.
	* Cons: This approach may allocate more memory than necessary, as it creates a new copy of the data. Additionally, this approach modifies the original array.
2. **Push**: Using the `push()` method to push elements from one array onto another array.
	* Pros: This approach is often faster and more efficient than concatenation, especially for large datasets, since it modifies the existing array in place without allocating new memory.
	* Cons: This approach can be slower when dealing with very large datasets due to potential performance overheads introduced by JavaScript engines.

**Library Used**

There is no explicit library used in this benchmark. The script preparation code and test cases are self-contained and do not rely on any external libraries.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The `fill()` method, which is used to create the arrays, is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). This method allows you to fill an array with a given value. The syntax `Array(100).fill([{n: ''}])` creates an array of 100 objects, all containing the same property `n` set to an empty string.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to explore other alternatives, here are a few examples:

1. **Spread operator**: Instead of using `concat()` or `push()`, you could use the spread operator (`...`) to concatenate arrays. For example: `var arr1 = [...arr2]`.
2. **Array.prototype.reduce()**: You could also use `reduce()` to concatenate two arrays by iterating over one array and appending elements from another array.
3. **Other libraries or frameworks**: Depending on your specific requirements, you might consider using a library like Lodash, which provides a comprehensive set of utility functions for array manipulation, including concatenation.

Keep in mind that the choice of alternative approaches depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

concat vs push1 (version: 0)

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):