Benchmark: Spread operator vs Array.prototype.concat()

Tests:

Array.prototype.concat()
const params = [1, 2, 3, 4] const other = params.concat(5)
Spread operator
const params = [1, 2, 3, 4] const other = [...params, 5]

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

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case that compares the performance of two approaches: using `Array.prototype.concat()` and the spread operator (`...`). This test is relevant for software engineers who want to optimize array concatenation in their JavaScript code.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **`Array.prototype.concat()`**: A method that creates a new array by copying elements from an existing array, followed by one or more arrays.
2. **Spread Operator (`...`)**: A syntax that allows spreading the elements of an array into a new array.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief analysis of each approach:

* **`Array.prototype.concat()`**:
	+ Pros: Widely supported, easy to use, and well-documented.
	+ Cons: Can be slower than the spread operator due to the overhead of method invocation.
* **Spread Operator (`...`)**:
	+ Pros: Faster, more concise, and expressive.
	+ Cons: Only widely supported in modern browsers and JavaScript engines (e.g., Node.js 14+).

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following:

* If you need to support older browsers or environments that don't support the spread operator, use `Array.prototype.concat()`.
* If performance is critical and you're targeting modern browsers or JavaScript engines, use the spread operator.
* If readability and conciseness are more important than a tiny performance boost, use the spread operator.

**Library and Syntax**

The test case uses the **spread operator (`...`)** in its `Benchmark Definition`. The library used here is not explicitly mentioned, but it's likely that the browser being tested (Chrome 103) supports the spread operator.

There's no special JS feature or syntax used in this benchmark. Both options are standard JavaScript features.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for array concatenation include:

* Using `Array.prototype.push()`: This method modifies the original array and can be slower than both `Array.prototype.concat()` and the spread operator.
* Using a library like Lodash's `concat` function: This can provide a performance boost over the native implementation, but may introduce additional dependencies.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be relevant for this specific benchmark test case.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.concat()	5561429.0 Ops/sec
Spread operator	42689164.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Spread operator vs Array.prototype.concat() (version: 0)

Which one is fastest to concat new item to an array?

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 29 days ago):