const a = ["a", "b", "c"];
const b = [a];
const a = ["a", "b", "c"];
const b = Object.assign([], a);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
spread | |
assign |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
spread | 37000504.0 Ops/sec |
assign | 441928.7 Ops/sec |
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks and explore what's being tested in this specific benchmark.
Benchmark Definition
The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition, which outlines the test scenario. In this case, there is no detailed description or script preparation code, but we can infer that the benchmark compares two approaches for creating a shallow copy of an array: using the spread operator (...
) and Object.assign()
.
Options being compared
The two options being compared are:
...
): This syntax creates a new array by spreading the elements of the original array into a new array.Pros and Cons
...
):Library
In this benchmark, there is no explicitly mentioned library, but Object.assign()
relies on the built-in JavaScript Object API. However, if we're considering external libraries that might be used in real-world scenarios, some notable ones are:
cloneDeep
method for creating deep copies of objects.$copy
function for creating shallow or deep copies of arrays.Special JS feature or syntax
There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the spread operator (...
) was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and has since become a standard part of modern JavaScript.
Other alternatives
If we were to consider alternative approaches for creating shallow copies of arrays, some options might include:
Array.prototype.slice()
: creates a shallow copy of an array by returning a new array object with references to the original elements.In conclusion, this benchmark provides a simple yet informative test case that highlights the differences between using the spread operator (...
) and Object.assign()
for creating shallow copies of arrays in JavaScript.