Benchmark: mutate Array - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

splice
let test = ['Jan', 'Feb', 'March', 'May'] test = test.splice(3, 1, 'April')
map
let test = ['Jan', 'Feb', 'March', 'May'] test = test.map((x, index) => index === 3 ? 'April' : x)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
splice
map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, the options being compared, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark definition is a simple JavaScript script that creates an array `test` with four elements: 'Jan', 'Feb', 'March', and 'May'. The script then applies either a `splice()` or a `map()` operation to the array.

**Options being compared**

* **Splice()**: Replaces a specified element with another value.
	+ Pros:
		- Can be useful when you need to add or remove elements from an array dynamically.
		- Can be faster than `map()` for small arrays or specific use cases.
	+ Cons:
		- Can lead to unexpected behavior if the index is out of range.
		- May not be suitable for large datasets due to potential performance issues.
* **Map()**: Creates a new array with the results of applying a provided function to each element in the original array.
	+ Pros:
		- Returns a new array, preserving the original data.
		- Can be more flexible and maintainable than `splice()`.
	+ Cons:
		- May consume more memory for large datasets due to creating a new array.
		- Can be slower than `splice()` for very small arrays or specific use cases.

**Library usage**
Neither of the test cases uses any libraries. However, it's worth noting that both functions (`splice()` and `map()`) are built-in JavaScript methods.

**Special JS feature/syntax**
There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in these benchmarks. The focus is solely on comparing the performance of two standard JavaScript methods.

**Other alternatives**

For similar use cases, other alternatives to `splice()` and `map()` might include:

* Using `filter()`, `forEach()`, and array slicing (e.g., `slice()` or `substr()`) for more complex transformations.
* Utilizing libraries like Lodash (`_.removeAt()`, `_.map()`) for additional functionality and potential performance benefits.
* Implementing custom solutions using loops, indexing, and other low-level optimizations.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not always be suitable or efficient for every situation, and the choice of method depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/108.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 108 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
splice	45705972.0 Ops/sec
map	64866640.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

mutate Array (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: splice vs map

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

splice

map

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):