Benchmark: fill vs push multiple small

Tests:

fill
let a = Array(60).fill(16); let b = Array(60).fill().map((_, idx) => 16 * idx);
push
let a = []; let b = []; for(let i = 0; i< 60;i++) { a.push(16); b.push(i*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.

Let's dive into explaining the JavaScript microbenchmark provided by MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that outlines the test scenario. In this case, there are two test cases: "fill" and "push". The test cases compare different approaches to create an array filled with values.

**Options Compared**

In the "fill" test case:

* Option 1: `Array(60).fill(16)`: This creates a new array with 60 elements, all initialized to 16 using the `.fill()` method.
* Option 2: `Array(60).fill().map((_, idx) => 16 * idx)`: This creates an empty array and then maps over it to create a new array with 60 elements, where each element is calculated as `16 * idx`.

In the "push" test case:

* Option 1: `[].push(16); [].push(i*16);` (in a loop): This uses a traditional approach with loops to push values onto an empty array.

**Pros and Cons**

The ".fill()" method in Option 1 is generally faster than the `map()` function in Option 2 because it doesn't require creating a new array, just initializing existing ones. However, this comes at the cost of flexibility, as each element must be initialized to the same value (in this case, 16).

In contrast, the `map()` function provides more flexibility but is slower due to the overhead of creating a new array.

The traditional "push" approach in Option 3 has the advantage of being very flexible and allows for any number of push operations, but it's also likely to be slower due to the additional overhead of function calls and loop control.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There are no external libraries used in these test cases.

**Test Users Special JS Feature or Syntax**

This benchmark doesn't use any special JavaScript features or syntax. It focuses on illustrating basic array initialization techniques in JavaScript.

**Other Alternatives**

For larger arrays, other approaches like using `Array.from()` with an iterable of values could be explored, but may not offer significant performance gains over the current options.

Some further variations of the "push" approach might involve combining multiple operations into a single loop or utilizing `forEach` instead of traditional loops for conciseness and expressiveness.

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/98.0.4758.102 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 98 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
fill	1081027.1 Ops/sec
push	3180989.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

fill vs push multiple small (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):