Benchmark: Spread vs. flatMap vs concat (v2)

Script Preparation code:

var arrays = [
    [1, 2, 3],
    [4, 5, 6]
]

Tests:

flatMap
arrays.flatMap(array => array)
Spread
var result = [] arrays.reduce((result, array) => { result.push(...array); return result; }, [])
concat
var result = [] arrays.reduce((result, array) => { return result.concat(array); }, [])

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
flatMap
Spread
concat

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what is being tested in the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three different ways to flatten an array in JavaScript:

1. `flatMap()`: A method introduced in ECMAScript 2019 (ES10) that flattens an array and returns a new array with the results.
2. Spread operator (`...`): Used to expand an array into its elements, which can then be used individually.
3. Concatenation using `concat()`: A built-in method that concatenates two or more arrays.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of each approach:

* `flatMap()` vs. spread operator (`...`)
* `flatMap()` vs. `concat()`
* Spread operator (`...`) vs. `concat()`

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **`flatMap()`**: Pros:
	* Simplifies array flattening by providing a concise way to achieve the result.
	* Can be more efficient than using spread operators or concatenation, especially for large arrays.
	* Part of the modern JavaScript standard (ES10).
2. **Spread operator (`...`)**: Pros:
	* Flexible and can be used in various contexts beyond array flattening.
	* Does not require a new function or method creation.
	* Can be more readable for simple cases.
3. **Concatenation using `concat()`**: Pros:
	+ Widely supported across older browsers and environments.
	+ Can be used with other methods like `push()`.

Cons:

* More verbose than `flatMap()` or spread operator (`...`).
* May incur additional overhead due to function calls or method invocations.
* Less readable for complex cases.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

In the benchmark, there is no explicit library usage mentioned. However, note that `flatMap()` was introduced in ECMAScript 2019 (ES10), making it a modern JavaScript feature.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing an approach, consider:

* Readability: How easy is the code to understand for other developers?
* Performance: Will the chosen method impact execution time or memory usage?
* Compatibility: Is the method supported across older browsers or environments?

**Alternatives**

If you need to flatten arrays in JavaScript, here are alternative approaches:

1. **Using `for` loop**: A simple and straightforward approach using a traditional `for` loop.
2. **Using `reduce()` with an initial value**: Similar to `flatMap()`, but without the method name.
3. **Using `map()` and `concat()`**: Flattening one array by mapping it to an array of its elements and then concatenating them.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might be less efficient or more verbose than using modern JavaScript methods like `flatMap()` or spread operator (`...`).

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/110.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 110 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
flatMap	13690328.0 Ops/sec
Spread	6710986.5 Ops/sec
concat	8920038.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Spread vs. flatMap vs concat (v2) (version: 0)

Measures performance of array spread vs. flatMap vs. concat

Comparing performance of: flatMap vs Spread vs concat

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

flatMap

Spread

concat

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):