var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ];
var other = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ];
var other = params.push( [1, 2]);
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ];
var other = params.push.apply(params, [1, 2]);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Array.prototype.concat | |
spread operator | |
apply |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Array.prototype.concat | 5707954.0 Ops/sec |
spread operator | 11669375.0 Ops/sec |
apply | 13729851.0 Ops/sec |
Let's dive into the benchmark and explain what's being tested.
What is being tested?
The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares three different approaches to concatenate arrays: Array.prototype.concat
, the spread operator (...
), and the apply()
method. The benchmark is designed to measure which approach performs better in terms of execution speed.
Options compared:
...
): This is a new syntax introduced in ES6 that allows you to expand an array into multiple arguments.Pros and cons of each approach:
...
):Library usage:
None of the benchmark cases explicitly use any external libraries. However, it's worth noting that Array.prototype.concat
is a built-in method on the Array prototype object in JavaScript.
Special JS features or syntax:
The only special feature used in this benchmark is the spread operator (...
). This is a new syntax introduced in ES6, which allows you to expand an array into multiple arguments. The other two approaches (concat and apply) use more traditional syntax.
Other alternatives:
If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches for concatenating arrays, here are a few examples:
Array.prototype.push()
with the spread operator (...
): params.push(...[1, 2])
Array.prototype.unshift()
with the spread operator (...
): params.unshift(...[1, 2])
concatArrays(arr1, arr2) { return [...arr1, ...arr2]; }
These alternatives may offer better performance or readability in certain situations, but they also come with their own trade-offs and potential drawbacks.