Benchmark: spread array performance (vs slice, splice, concat) 2

Tests:

Splice
const testArray = [1, 2, 3]; const newTestArray = testArray.splice(0);
Slice
const testArray = [1, 2, 3]; const newTestArray = testArray.slice();
Concat
const testArray = [1, 2, 3]; const newTestArray = testArray.concat();
Spread
const testArray = [1, 2, 3]; const newTestArray = [...testArray];
Ебал я в рот эти тесты
const testArray = [1, 2, 3]; const newTestArray = testArray.slice();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Splice
Slice
Concat
Spread
Ебал я в рот эти тесты

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 15_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) CriOS/92.0.4515.90 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile iOS 92 on iOS 15.0

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Splice	7610294.5 Ops/sec
Slice	32662624.0 Ops/sec
Concat	5329012.0 Ops/sec
Spread	178774416.0 Ops/sec
Ебал я в рот эти тесты	33298064.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Explanation**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case named "spread array performance (vs slice, splice, concat) 2". This benchmark tests the performance of different methods for creating a new copy of an array: `splice`, `slice`, `concat`, and `spread`.

**Options Compared**

The options being compared are:

1. **Splice**: The `splice` method creates a new array by removing elements from the original array.
2. **Slice**: The `slice` method creates a shallow copy of the original array, excluding any null or undefined values.
3. **Concat**: The `concat` method concatenates an array with another array (or value).
4. **Spread**: The spread operator (`...`) creates a new array by copying elements from the original array.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **Splice**:
    *   Pros: Does not create a shallow copy of the original array, which can be beneficial for large arrays.
    *   Cons: Removes elements from the original array, making it less suitable for some use cases.
*   **Slice**:
    *   Pros: Creates a shallow copy of the original array and is often faster than `concat`.
    *   Cons: Does not modify the original array, but creates a new one with references to the same elements.
*   **Concat**:
    *   Pros: Creates a new array that combines two or more arrays (or values).
    *   Cons: Can be slower than other methods for creating a new copy of an array and modifies the original array if passed by reference.
*   **Spread**:
    *   Pros: Creates a new array that copies elements from the original array without modifying it.
    *   Cons: May have performance implications due to the need to create a new array.

**Library Usage**

None

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The benchmark uses modern JavaScript features such as `const`, arrow functions, and template literals. The test cases also use ES6+ syntax (e.g., spread operator).

**Alternative Approaches**

Other methods for creating a new copy of an array include:

*   Using the `Array.from()` method to create a new array from an iterable.
*   Using the `Array.prototype.map()` method with an identity function (e.g., `() => x`) to create a new array.
*   Using the `Array.prototype.reduce()` method with an identity function (e.g., `(x, y) => [x, y]`) to create a new array.

Keep in mind that these alternative approaches might have different performance characteristics and use cases compared to the methods being tested.

Related benchmarks:

spread array performance (vs slice, splice, concat) 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Splice vs Slice vs Concat vs Spread vs Ебал я в рот эти тесты

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Splice

Slice

Concat

Spread

Ебал я в рот эти тесты

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):