var groups = [[], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], []];
const groups2 = new Array(9).fill([])
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
2d array | |
2d array 2 |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
2d array | 132624744.0 Ops/sec |
2d array 2 | 14197170.0 Ops/sec |
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.
First Approach (Test Name: "2d array")
var groups = [[], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], []];
Second Approach (Test Name: "2d array 2")
const groups2 = new Array(9).fill([]);
First Approach:
Pros:
Cons:
Second Approach:
Pros:
Cons:
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.
Other methods to create a 2D array might include:
Using Array.from:
const groups3 = Array.from({ length: 9 }, () => []);
Using Map:
const groups4 = new Map();
for (let i = 0; i < 9; i++) {
groups4.set(i, []);
}
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.