const numbers = [1, 2, 3];
const result = [numbers, 10];
const numbers = [1, 2, 3];
const result = [10, numbers];
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Spread array at head | |
Spread array at tail |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Spread array at head | 26651440.0 Ops/sec |
Spread array at tail | 35164180.0 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the provided benchmark and its test cases.
Benchmark Definition
The benchmark is defined by a JSON object that describes two test cases: Spread Operator: Array
. The goal of this benchmark is to compare the performance of JavaScript when using the spread operator (...
) in different ways.
Options Compared
There are two options compared:
const result = [10, ...numbers];
.const result = [...numbers, 10];
.Pros and Cons of Each Approach
Library Usage
There is no library explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. However, JavaScript's built-in Array.prototype.push()
and Array.prototype.unshift()
methods are used in both test cases.
Special JS Features or Syntax
The spread operator (...
) is a new feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It allows for more concise array creation and manipulation.
Other Considerations
Alternative Approaches
Other approaches to achieve similar results include:
Array.prototype.concat()
and modifying the resulting array's length property: const result = [...numbers].concat([10]);
let result = []; for (const num of numbers) { result.push(num); } result.push(10);
However, these approaches may have different performance characteristics compared to using the spread operator.
Overall, this benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two specific use cases involving the JavaScript spread operator. By understanding the pros and cons of each approach, developers can choose the most efficient method for their use case.