Benchmark: reduce.concat() vs flat() vs spread2

Tests:

reduce + spread
var params = [[ 1, 2 ], [ "hello", true, 7 ]]; var other = params.reduce((acc, val) => [...acc, ...val], []);
Array.prototype.flat
var params = [[1, 2, params], [ "hello", true, 7 ]]; var other = params.flat();
reduce + concat
var params = [[ 1, 2 ], [ "hello", true, 7 ]]; var other = params.reduce((acc, val) => acc.concat(val), []);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
reduce + spread
Array.prototype.flat
reduce + concat

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.5060.114 Safari/537.36 Edg/103.0.1264.62

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
reduce + spread	11467004.0 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.flat	779781.5 Ops/sec
reduce + concat	6839556.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark that compares three approaches to concatenate arrays in JavaScript:

1. `reduce` with the spread operator (`...`)
2. `Array.prototype.flat()`
3. Traditional concatenation using `concat()` method

These approaches are compared to understand their performance differences, especially considering the new ES6 spread operator.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares three options for array concatenation:

1. **`reduce` with spread operator**: This approach uses the `reduce()` method to iterate over the array elements and concatenate them using the spread operator (`...`). The callback function takes two arguments: the accumulator (`acc`) and the current element (`val`).
2. **`Array.prototype.flat()`**: This is a native JavaScript method that flattens an array of arrays into a single array.
3. **Traditional concatenation with `concat()` method**: This approach uses the `concat()` method to concatenate two or more arrays.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

1. **`reduce` with spread operator**:
	* Pros: concise syntax, efficient for small arrays, easy to implement.
	* Cons: can be slower than traditional concatenation for large arrays due to the overhead of the `reduce()` method.
2. **`Array.prototype.flat()`**:
	* Pros: fast and efficient for flattening arrays of arrays.
	* Cons: not directly applicable to concatenating arrays, requires creating a new array.
3. **Traditional concatenation with `concat()` method**:
	* Pros: widely supported and well-documented, suitable for large arrays.
	* Cons: can be slower than the other two approaches due to the overhead of the `concat()` method.

**Library and syntax**

No libraries or special JavaScript features are used in this benchmark. The focus is solely on comparing different array concatenation approaches.

**Other considerations**

When dealing with large arrays, it's essential to consider the trade-offs between performance, memory usage, and code readability. In general:

* For small to medium-sized arrays, the `reduce` approach with the spread operator can be a good choice due to its concise syntax.
* For large arrays or performance-critical applications, `Array.prototype.flat()` might be a better option due to its efficiency.
* Traditional concatenation using the `concat()` method is suitable for large arrays but may have performance overhead.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to array concatenation in JavaScript, consider:

* Using `Array.prototype.push()` with an array of elements: `arr.push(...elements)`.
* Utilizing modern JavaScript features like `...` (spread operator) and `Map` or `Set` data structures.
* Leveraging libraries like Lodash or Ramda for functional programming approaches.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach ultimately depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and coding style preferences.

Related benchmarks:

reduce.concat() vs flat() vs spread2 (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: reduce + spread vs Array.prototype.flat vs reduce + concat

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

reduce + spread

Array.prototype.flat

reduce + concat

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):