Benchmark: asdfasdf - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var a = [1,1,1,1,23,,5,6,3,2132,,66,456,,546];
var s = []

Tests:

spread
s.push(...a);
p-push
Array.prototype.push.apply(s, a);
[] push
[].push.apply(s, a);
self push
s.push.apply(s, a);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
spread
p-push
[] push
self push

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark tests the performance of different approaches to add elements to an array.

In this specific case, the benchmark is comparing four different methods to push elements onto an array:

1. Using the spread operator (`s.push(...a);`)
2. Using `Array.prototype.push.apply(s, a);`
3. Creating a new array and using the `push` method on that array (`[]`.push.apply(s, a);`)
4. Calling the `push` method directly on the original array (`s.push.apply(s, a);`)

**Options compared:**

The benchmark is comparing four different approaches:

1. Spread operator (`s.push(...a);`)
2. `Array.prototype.push.apply(s, a);`
3. Creating a new array and using `push` (`[]`.push.apply(s, a);`)
4. Directly calling `push` on the original array (`s.push.apply(s, a);`)

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Spread operator**: This approach is often considered the most concise and readable way to add elements to an array. It creates a new array with all elements from the original array, which can be beneficial for certain use cases.
	* Pros: Concise, readable, creates a new array (which can improve performance in some cases)
	* Cons: Creates a new array, which can increase memory usage
2. **`Array.prototype.push.apply(s, a);`**: This approach is similar to the spread operator but uses the `push` method on the array prototype.
	* Pros: Fast, efficient way to add elements to an array
	* Cons: Can be less readable than the spread operator, may require extra effort to understand
3. **Creating a new array and using `push`**: This approach creates a new array instance and then uses the `push` method on that array.
	* Pros: Allows for more control over the array creation process
	* Cons: May be less efficient than other approaches, requires creating a new array instance
4. **Directly calling `push` on the original array**: This approach is similar to the spread operator but uses the `push` method directly on the original array.
	* Pros: Fast, efficient way to add elements to an array
	* Cons: Can be less readable than other approaches

**Library usage:**

None of the provided test cases use any external libraries.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

None of the provided test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond standard ECMAScript.

**Other considerations:**

The benchmark results suggest that the `Array.prototype.push.apply(s, a);` approach is generally the fastest and most efficient way to add elements to an array in Firefox 57. However, it's essential to note that performance can vary depending on the specific use case and browser version.

Alternative approaches to consider:

1. Using modern JavaScript features like `flatMap()` or `fill()`, which may provide more readable and efficient solutions for certain use cases.
2. Using libraries like Lodash or Underscore.js, which provide utility functions for array manipulation that may be faster or more efficient than native methods.
3. Optimizing the benchmark test case to include additional inputs or variations, such as testing with large arrays or handling edge cases.

Keep in mind that this is a JavaScript-specific benchmark, and the results may not generalize to other programming languages or environments.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2025 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:57.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/57.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 57 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
spread	1068840.1 Ops/sec
p-push	1389114.1 Ops/sec
[] push	758936.3 Ops/sec
self push	69068.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

asdfasdf (version: 0)

asdf

Comparing performance of: spread vs p-push vs [] push vs self push

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

spread

p-push

[] push

self push

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):