Benchmark: from vs stat1 - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

stat
const test2 =()=> [0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1];
Array.from()
const test1 = ()=>Array.from(Array(11).keys(), (i) => i / 10);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
stat
Array.from()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

This benchmark compares two ways to create an array of numbers from 0 to 1 in increments of 0.1.

**Options Compared:**

* **`stat`:** This approach uses a simple declaration with literal values: 
   ```javascript
   const test2 =()=> [0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1];
   ```

* **`Array.from()`:** This approach uses the `Array.from()` method to generate the array:
   ```javascript
   const test1 = ()=>Array.from(Array(11).keys(), (i) => i / 10);
   ```

**Pros and Cons:**

* **`stat` (Literal Values):**
    * **Pros:**  Very concise and easy to read.
    * **Cons:** Can be less flexible if you need to dynamically change the number of elements or the increment size.

* **`Array.from()`:** 
    * **Pros:** More flexible. You can easily adjust the array size and increment using parameters passed to `Array(11).keys()`. It's also a more general-purpose method for creating arrays from iterables.
    * **Cons:** Slightly less readable than the literal value approach for this specific scenario.

**Other Considerations:**

* **Performance:** In most cases, these two approaches will have very similar performance. The difference is likely to be negligible unless you're dealing with extremely large arrays. This benchmark shows that `Array.from()` is slightly faster in this particular case.

**Alternatives:**

While less common for creating simple number sequences, here are some alternatives:

* **`for` Loop:** You could use a `for` loop to explicitly create the array elements. This gives you more fine-grained control but can be more verbose.
* **`reduce()`:**  You could use the `reduce()` method to build the array incrementally.

Let me know if you have any other questions!

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/117.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 117 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
stat	2654416896.0 Ops/sec
Array.from()	2659238912.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

from vs stat1 (version: 0)

Testing the difference between creating filled arrays.

Comparing performance of: stat vs Array.from()

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

stat

Array.from()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated one month ago):