Benchmark: Slice vs Filter (2222211111)-4

Script Preparation code:

var index = 50;
var item = 10;
var array = Array.from({length: 100},()=>Math.random());

Tests:

slice
[...array.slice(0, index), item, ...array.slice(index + 1)]
map
array.map((val, i) => i === index ? item : val);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
slice
map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark test case:

**Benchmark Purpose**

The purpose of this benchmark is to compare the performance of two approaches: using `Array.prototype.slice()` and using a custom filtering function with `Array.prototype.filter()`. The test aims to determine which approach is faster for slicing an array.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared in this benchmark:

1. **`Array.prototype.slice()`**: This method returns a shallow copy of a portion of an array. It takes two arguments: the start index and the end index (exclusive). In this test, `index` is set to 50, and the slice operation is performed on the entire array.
2. **Custom Filtering Function with `Array.prototype.filter()`**: This method creates a new array with all elements that pass the test implemented by the provided function. In this test, a custom filtering function is used to filter out elements before slicing the remaining parts of the array.

**Pros and Cons**

* **`Array.prototype.slice()`**:
	+ Pros: Easy to use, widely supported, and well-documented.
	+ Cons: Creates a new array and can be slower than other methods for large datasets.
* **Custom Filtering Function with `Array.prototype.filter()`**:
	+ Pros: Can be more efficient for large datasets, as it avoids creating a new array. Also, allows for more control over the filtering process.
	+ Cons: Requires more code to implement, and may have higher overhead due to function call.

**Library Usage**

In this test case, no libraries are explicitly mentioned, but `Array.from()` is used to create an array with a random length of 100 elements. This method is a part of the ECMAScript standard (ES6+) and is widely supported in modern browsers.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's mentioned above (e.g., ES6+ features).

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative methods to slice an array, you could consider:

* `Array.prototype.subarray()` (a more recent addition to the ECMAScript standard)
* Using a simple loop to iterate over the elements of the original array
* Utilizing modern libraries like Lodash or Ramda, which provide optimized implementations of array slicing and filtering functions.

Keep in mind that the choice of method often depends on the specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.198 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 86 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
slice	1011895.1 Ops/sec
filter	122778.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Slice vs Filter (2222211111)-4 (version: 3)

Comparing performance of: slice vs map

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

slice

map

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):