Benchmark: unshift01001001 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

a = [1,2,3,4,5]
setTimeout(()=>{console.log('start')}, 500)

Tests:

[123].concat(a)
b = [123].concat(a) console.log(b)
console.log(a.length)
console.log(a.length)
unshift
a.unshift(123) console.log(b)
console.log(a.length) - 2
console.log(a.length)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
[123].concat(a)
console.log(a.length)
unshift
console.log(a.length) - 2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.96 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
[123].concat(a)	64307.1 Ops/sec
console.log(a.length)	101421.0 Ops/sec
unshift	30766.0 Ops/sec
console.log(a.length) - 2	17043.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of JavaScript code is crucial in ensuring that our applications are efficient and scalable. MeasuringThat.net provides a great platform for doing just that.

Let's break down the provided benchmark JSON:

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Script Preparation Code` section contains a JavaScript script that creates an array `a` with five elements, and then sets up a timeout to log the string "start" to the console after 500 milliseconds. This script is run once before running any of the test cases.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are four test cases:

1. **Concatenation**: The test case concatenates array `a` with an array containing the single element `[123]`. This tests the performance of the `concat()` method.
2. **Console Log**: The first test case logs the length of array `a` to the console. This tests the performance of the `console.log()` function, specifically its execution time for a simple statement.
3. **Array Unshift**: The third test case performs an unshift operation on array `a`, adding the element `123`. This tests the performance of the `unshift()` method.
4. **Console Log with offset**: The fourth test case logs the length of array `a` to the console, but subtracts 2 from the result. This is a variant of the first test case, testing the performance of the `console.log()` function with an arithmetic operation.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, two main options are being compared:

1. **Concatenation vs. Unshift**: The performance difference between using `concat()` versus `unshift()` to add elements to an array.
2. **Console Log**: The performance of logging simple values to the console using `console.log()`, including variations with arithmetic operations.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Concatenation vs. Unshift**
	* Pros:
		+ Concatenation is often simpler and more intuitive, as it allows for a single operation to add elements.
	* Cons:
		+ Concatenation creates a new array, which can be slower than modifying the existing array in place (unshift).
2. **Console Log**
	* Pros:
		+ Logging simple values to the console is often faster and more efficient than performing complex operations.
	* Cons:
		+ The performance difference may be negligible for most use cases.

**Library Usage**

There are no libraries explicitly mentioned in this benchmark, but some libraries like `lodash` or `console-polyfill` might be used to extend the functionality of the JavaScript engine. However, these are not specific to this benchmark and would not affect the overall analysis.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The only special feature/syntax used in this benchmark is the use of `setTimeout()` to introduce a delay between the script preparation code and the test cases. This allows for a more accurate measurement of the performance difference between the various approaches.

In summary, this benchmark provides a great comparison of different JavaScript approaches: concatenation vs. unshift, and simple console log operations with arithmetic offsets. By analyzing these results, developers can make informed decisions about optimizing their code for better performance in real-world scenarios.

Related benchmarks:

unshift01001001 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: [123].concat(a) vs console.log(a.length) vs unshift vs console.log(a.length) - 2

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

[123].concat(a)

console.log(a.length)

unshift

console.log(a.length) - 2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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