Benchmark: Array concat vs spread operator vs push333

Tests:

Array.prototype.concat
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = [ 1, 2 ]; other = other.concat(params);
Push
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = [ 1, 2 ]; other.push(...params);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.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 llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark that compares three different ways to concatenate arrays in JavaScript:

1. `Array.prototype.concat()`
2. The spread operator (`...`)
3. Using the `push()` method repeatedly (in this case, 333 times)

**Options being compared:**

1. **`Array.prototype.concat()`**: This is a built-in array method that concatenates two or more arrays into one.
	* Pros:
		+ Easy to read and understand
		+ Works well for small to medium-sized arrays
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower than other methods for large arrays due to the overhead of creating a new array
2. **Spread operator (`...`)**: This is an ES6 feature that allows you to "spread" the elements of one or more arrays into another.
	* Pros:
		+ Very concise and expressive syntax
		+ Can be faster than `concat()` for large arrays since it avoids creating a new array
	* Cons:
		+ Only available in modern JavaScript environments (ES6+)
3. **`push()` method**: This is a built-in array method that adds one or more elements to the end of an array.
	* Pros:
		+ Can be faster than `concat()` for very large arrays since it avoids creating a new array
		+ Works well when adding small amounts of data to an existing array
	* Cons:
		+ Requires multiple method calls (in this case, 333 times) which can lead to performance issues

**Other considerations:**

1. **Library usage**: In this benchmark, no external libraries are used.
2. **Special JS feature or syntax**: The spread operator (`...`) is a special ES6 feature being tested in this benchmark.

**Alternative approaches:**

1. **`set()` method**: This method creates a new Set object from an array of values. While not directly related to concatenation, it can be used as an alternative for small arrays.
2. **`concat()` with slicing**: Instead of using `push()` repeatedly, you could concatenate the original array with itself using slicing (`arr = arr.concat(arr.slice(0, 333))`). This approach is less efficient than the spread operator but might offer better performance in certain scenarios.

**Benchmark results:**

The provided JSON contains benchmark results for two test cases:

1. `Array.prototype.concat()`: executed approximately 10.36 million times per second
2. **Push**: executed approximately 3.35 million times per second

Keep in mind that these results are specific to the provided test case and might not reflect real-world performance differences.

I hope this explanation helps you understand the benchmark being tested!

Related benchmarks:

Array concat vs spread operator vs push333 (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method and push

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype.concat vs Push

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.concat

Push

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):