Benchmark: 2d array creating

Tests:

2d array
var groups = [[], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], []];
2d array 2
const groups2 = new Array(9).fill([])

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
2d array
2d array 2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 12 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 135 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
2d array	132624744.0 Ops/sec
2d array 2	14197170.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 12 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark provided tests the performance of two different approaches to creating a two-dimensional array (2D array) using JavaScript. Each approach is characterized by a specific code snippet, and the performance is measured in terms of executions per second.

### Options Compared
1. **First Approach (Test Name: "2d array")**
   ```javascript
   var groups = [[], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], []];
   ```
   - This method explicitly creates an array with nine empty sub-arrays. It's straightforward and directly shows the intention of creating a 2D array structure.

2. **Second Approach (Test Name: "2d array 2")**
   ```javascript
   const groups2 = new Array(9).fill([]);
   ```
   - This method creates an array with nine references to the same empty array. Although it appears to create a 2D structure, all entries in this array point to the same single empty array.

### Pros and Cons

**First Approach:**
- **Pros:**
  - Clear intention: It's explicit that you want independent sub-arrays.
  - Each sub-array is a separate instance, which is essential for 2D array manipulation (e.g., if you push items into one sub-array, others remain unaffected).
  
- **Cons:**
  - Lengthier code compared to the second approach, as you manually define the structure.

**Second Approach:**
- **Pros:**
  - More concise: Less code to write when initializing the structure.
  - Easier to read and understand at a glance.

- **Cons:**
  - All the sub-arrays reference the same instance. Thus, any modification to one sub-array affects all others. This can lead to unexpected behavior in applications where independent sub-arrays are expected.

### Other Considerations
- **Use Case:** The choice between the two methods depends largely on the intended use of the 2D array. If the goal is to store distinct rows or sets of data, the first method is superior. If there’s a need for a placeholder structure and independent modification is not necessary, the second could suffice.
  
- **Memory Efficiency:** The first approach uses more memory since it creates multiple instances of arrays, whereas the second approach uses memory more efficiently by referencing the same array. However, this efficiency can backfire if not used cautiously.

### Alternatives
Other methods to create a 2D array might include:

1. **Using Array.from:**
   ```javascript
   const groups3 = Array.from({ length: 9 }, () => []);
   ```
   - This creates a new array with separate sub-arrays, similar to the first approach but potentially cleaner in terms of syntax.

2. **Using Map:**
   ```javascript
   const groups4 = new Map();
   for (let i = 0; i < 9; i++) {
       groups4.set(i, []);
   }
   ```
   - A more complex structure that allows for dynamic key-value pairs. While this adds overhead, it can be beneficial for associating keys with each sub-array.

Each alternative comes with its own trade-offs in terms of clarity, speed of creation, and usability based on the specific needs of the application. When choosing between these approaches, developers should consider the expected array manipulation patterns and memory use implications in their specific context.

Related benchmarks:

2d array creating (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: 2d array vs 2d array 2

Created: 12 days ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

2d array

2d array 2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 12 days ago):