Benchmark: Slice vs Pop vs directAccess

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [1, 3, 5, 11, 13];

Tests:

Slice
arr.slice(0, -1);
Pop
arr.pop();
direct
arr[arr.length-1]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Slice
Pop
direct

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of microbenchmarks!

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare three different approaches for accessing and removing elements from an array: `arr.slice(0, -1)`, `arr.pop()`, and direct access using `arr[arr.length-1]`.

**Options Compared**

*   `slice`: This method creates a new array by extracting a slice of the original array.
*   `pop`: This method removes the last element from the array and returns it. If the array is empty, it returns `undefined`.
*   `direct`: This approach uses direct indexing to access the second-to-last element in the array.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **slice**: Pros:
    *   Creates a new array with the desired elements.
    *   Can be more efficient if the resulting array is smaller than the original.
*   Cons:
    *   Requires additional memory allocation.
    *   May not be as fast as direct indexing for large arrays.
*   `pop`:
    *   Pros:
        *   Removes the last element in a single operation.
        *   Does not require additional memory allocation.
    *   Cons:
        *   Returns `undefined` if the array is empty.
        *   May be slower than direct indexing for small arrays.
*   **direct**:
    *   Pros:
        *   Fast and efficient access to individual elements.
        *   Does not create a new array or allocate additional memory.
    *   Cons:
        *   Requires careful handling of out-of-bounds indices.
        *   May be slower than `slice` for larger arrays due to the indirect indexing.

**Library Used (if any)**

There is no specific library used in this benchmark. The script only relies on standard JavaScript features and built-in array methods.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark uses a special syntax in the `Script Preparation Code`, where an array `arr` is initialized with some values: `var arr = [1, 3, 5, 11, 13];`. This is not a specific JavaScript feature but rather a way to provide a sample data structure for testing.

**Other Alternatives**

For similar benchmarks, you might also want to consider:

*   Measuring the performance of different array methods, such as `arr.forEach()`, `arr.map()`, or `arr.reduce()`.
*   Comparing the performance of JavaScript engines like V8 (used in Chrome), SpiderMonkey (used in Firefox), or JavaScriptCore (used in Safari).
*   Investigating the impact of JavaScript features like closures, async/await, or Promises on performance.
*   Testing the performance of different data structures, such as arrays vs. linked lists or trees.

Keep in mind that the choice of benchmark depends on your specific use case and goals.

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/100.0.4896.75 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 100 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Slice	11139528.0 Ops/sec
Pop	16074742.0 Ops/sec
direct	5252694.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Slice vs Pop vs directAccess (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Slice vs Pop vs direct

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Slice

Pop

direct

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):