Benchmark: spread vs concat vs unshift correct

Script Preparation code:

var array = [1,2,3];

Tests:

arrayUnshift123
array.unshift(0);
arrayConcat123
array = [0].concat(array)
arraySpread123
array = [0, ...array]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
arrayUnshift123
arrayConcat123
arraySpread123

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 and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark definition specifies that three different methods are being compared:

1. `unshift(0)`: This method adds an element to the end of an array without modifying its length.
2. `[...array]` (spread syntax): This method creates a new array by spreading the existing array into a new array.
3. `[0].concat(array)` : This method concatenates two arrays, where one of them is created by taking the first element of another array and combining it with the original array.

**What are being compared?**
The benchmark compares the performance (measured in executions per second) of these three methods on a sample JavaScript array `[1, 2, 3]`.

**Options Comparison**

* `unshift(0)` vs `[...array]` vs `[0].concat(array)`
	+ **Pros and Cons:**
		- `unshift(0)`: Simple and efficient for small arrays. However, it can be slow for large arrays because it needs to update the array's length.
		- `[...array]`: Creates a new array, which is more memory-efficient but slower than modifying the original array.
		- `[0].concat(array)`: Concatenates two arrays, which is slower and less efficient than modifying the original array.
* **Other Considerations:**
	+ The benchmark does not consider other methods like `push(0)` or using `Array.prototype.push()` with an initial value.

**Library Usage**
None of the test cases use any external libraries.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**
The test case uses the spread syntax `[...array]`, which is a relatively recent feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Benchmark Preparation Code and HTML Preparation Code**
The benchmark preparation code creates an array `var array = [1,2,3];`. The HTML preparation code is empty (`null`), indicating that the test does not require any HTML setup.

**Other Alternatives**
If you wanted to add more tests or variations, you could consider:

* Using other methods for adding elements to the end of an array (e.g., `push(0)`, `Array.prototype.push()` with an initial value)
* Comparing performance with different array lengths or distributions
* Testing other array manipulation methods, such as `slice()`, `splice()`, or `map()`
* Using different browsers or devices to test compatibility and variability in performance

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/89.0.4389.128 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 89 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
arrayUnshift123	30283.4 Ops/sec
arrayConcat123	572.1 Ops/sec
arraySpread123	128.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

spread vs concat vs unshift correct (version: 0)

spread vs concat vs unshift

Comparing performance of: arrayUnshift123 vs arrayConcat123 vs arraySpread123

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

arrayUnshift123

arrayConcat123

arraySpread123

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):