let arrayTest = new Array(2500);
for (let i = 0; i < arrayTest.length; i++){
arrayTest[i] = Math.random();
}
let arrayTest = new Array(2500).fill(Math.random());
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
For Loop fill | |
Array Fill |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
For Loop fill | 5160.5 Ops/sec |
Array Fill | 344951.2 Ops/sec |
Let's dive into the explanation.
What is being tested?
The provided benchmark compares two approaches for filling an array with random values:
for
statement to iterate over the length of the array and assign a random value to each element.fill()
method on an empty array, which automatically fills it with a specified value (in this case, Math.random()
).Options compared:
The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches:
Pros and Cons:
Library/Utility:
In the benchmark definition JSON, the Array Fill
approach uses the built-in fill()
method on an empty array. This method is part of the ECMAScript standard, making it widely supported across browsers.
Special JavaScript feature or syntax:
There are no special features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark definition. The focus is solely on comparing two different approaches for filling an array with random values.
Other alternatives:
If you wanted to test alternative methods for filling arrays, some possible alternatives could be:
Array.prototype.map()
followed by a reducer functionKeep in mind that these alternatives might not necessarily be more efficient or relevant to the specific use case compared to the For Loop and Array Fill approaches.
Benchmark preparation code:
The provided Script Preparation Code and Html Preparation Code are empty, suggesting that the benchmark is designed to focus on the performance difference between two programming approaches rather than other factors like HTML parsing or rendering.