Benchmark: fill vs push - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

fill
let a = Array(600000).fill(16)
push
let a = []; for(let i = 0; i< 600000;i++) a.push(16);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
fill
push

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of JavaScript arrays is a fundamental aspect of web development, and MeasureThat.net provides a valuable tool for benchmarking different approaches.

The provided JSON represents a single benchmark test case, which consists of two individual test cases: "fill" and "push". These test cases compare the performance of creating an array with `Array().fill()` versus using a loop to push elements one by one.

**Options compared:**

1. **`Array().fill()`**: This method creates a new array with a specified length, filling all elements with a given value (in this case, 16). It is a concise and efficient way to create an array.
2. **Loop-based approach using `push()`**: This method uses a loop to push individual elements onto the array, one by one.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **`Array().fill()`**:
	+ Pros: Concise, efficient, and easy to read.
	+ Cons: May not be suitable for large arrays or performance-critical applications.
* **Loop-based approach using `push()`**:
	+ Pros: Can be used for large arrays, and some developers may find it more intuitive than the `fill()` method.
	+ Cons: More verbose, less efficient, and potentially slower due to the overhead of the loop.

Other considerations:

* **Array initialization**: In modern JavaScript, using `Array().fill()` or `Array.from()` is generally preferred over manual array creation using `new Array()` or loops. This is because these methods are more efficient and easier to read.
* **Browser differences**: The test results show variations in performance between different browsers (Yandex Browser 22 and Chrome). This highlights the importance of testing on multiple platforms to ensure compatibility.

**Library/Tool Used:**

MeasureThat.net itself is a web-based tool, not a JavaScript library. It provides a simple interface for creating and running benchmark tests using various JavaScript features.

Since there are no specific libraries mentioned in the provided JSON, we can assume that MeasureThat.net handles the necessary setup and execution of the benchmarks internally.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**

None are explicitly mentioned in the provided JSON. However, it's worth noting that some modern browsers have introduced features like `Array.from()` and `Array.prototype.fill()` which are not supported by older browsers. Ensure your benchmark tests account for these differences if you plan to run them on multiple platforms.

**Alternatives:**

For running JavaScript benchmarks or measuring performance, other alternatives include:

1. **Benchmark.js**: A popular benchmarking library for Node.js.
2. **jsbench**: A simple command-line tool for creating and running JavaScript benchmarks.
3. **Benchmark.org**: Another online platform for creating and sharing JavaScript benchmarks.

These tools can provide more advanced features and flexibility than MeasureThat.net, but may require more setup and configuration to get started.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/100.0.4896.143 YaBrowser/22.5.0.1916 Yowser/2.5 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Yandex Browser 22 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
fill	589.0 Ops/sec
push	104.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

fill vs push (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: fill vs push

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

fill

push

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):