Benchmark: 2 6Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator 2

Tests:

Array.prototype.concat
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);
spread operator
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [ 1, 2, ...params ]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.concat
spread operator

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/102.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 102 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.concat	11312749.0 Ops/sec
spread operator	54286920.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in the provided JSON benchmark.

**Benchmark Purpose**

The purpose of this benchmark is to compare two approaches for concatenating arrays in JavaScript:

1. **Array.prototype.concat()**: The traditional method of concatenating arrays using the `concat()` method.
2. **Spread Operator (`...`)**: The new ES6 spread operator, introduced in ECMAScript 2015, which allows for more concise array literals.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the execution performance of these two approaches:

* `Array.prototype.concat()`: This approach uses the `concat()` method to concatenate arrays.
* Spread Operator (`...`): This approach uses the spread operator to expand an array literal and concatenate it with another array.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Array.prototype.concat()**:
	* Pros:
		+ Wide browser support (most browsers support `concat()`).
		+ Can handle large arrays efficiently.
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower than the spread operator due to the overhead of method invocation.
2. **Spread Operator (`...`)**:
	* Pros:
		+ More concise and readable syntax.
		+ Often faster than `concat()` due to the compiler's ability to optimize it into a simple array creation operation.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be supported in older browsers (only introduced in ECMAScript 2015).

**Library or Framework**

None of the provided benchmark code uses any external libraries or frameworks.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The spread operator (`...`) is a new JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015. It allows for more concise array literals and can be used to expand an existing array into multiple arrays.

**Other Alternatives**

Other alternatives to `Array.prototype.concat()` include:

* **Array.push()**: This method appends elements to the end of an array, which can be less efficient than `concat()` for large arrays.
* **Array.splice()**: This method modifies an array by inserting or removing elements at a specified index. While it can be used for concatenation, it's generally less efficient and more error-prone.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided `Script Preparation Code` is empty, which means that the benchmark script will start execution from the beginning of the provided benchmark definition code.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case compares the performance of one approach against another:

1. The first test case compares the spread operator (`...`) with the traditional `Array.prototype.concat()` method.
2. The second test case compares the spread operator (`...`) alone, without any additional input arrays.

The latest benchmark results show that the spread operator performs slightly better than `Array.prototype.concat()`.

Related benchmarks:

2 6Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator 2 (version: 0)

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

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.concat

spread operator

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):