Benchmark: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator no jQuery

Tests:

Array.prototype.concat
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);
spread operator
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [ 1, 2, ...params ]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.concat
spread operator

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Explanation**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test on MeasureThat.net, which compares the performance of two approaches to concatenate arrays in JavaScript: `Array.prototype.concat()` and the new ES6 spread operator (`...`).

**Approaches Compared**

1. **Array.prototype.concat()**: This method is a traditional way to concatenate arrays in JavaScript. It creates a new array by copying elements from the original array(s) and adding them to the end.
2. **Spread Operator (`...`)**: Introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6), the spread operator allows you to expand an array or object into individual elements, making it easier to concatenate arrays.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Array.prototype.concat()**:
	+ Pros: widely supported across browsers and JavaScript engines.
	+ Cons: can be slower due to the overhead of creating a new array and iterating over the original arrays.
* **Spread Operator (`...`)**:
	+ Pros: concise, efficient, and often faster than `concat()`.
	+ Cons: requires support for ES6 features in the target browser or JavaScript engine.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, if any library is used indirectly (e.g., for testing purposes), it's likely that the tests are designed to be platform-agnostic and compatible with various environments.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are mentioned in this benchmark. Both approaches use standard JavaScript syntax and should work across most browsers and environments without any specific requirements.

**Alternatives**

If you want to explore alternative methods for concatenating arrays, here are a few options:

* **Array.prototype.push()**: This method appends elements to the end of an array, which can be faster than `concat()` but might not produce the same results if you're trying to concatenate two separate arrays.
* **Array.prototype.splice()**: This method modifies the original array by replacing its contents with a new array. It's often faster than `concat()` but requires modifying the original array.
* **String concatenation**: In some cases, using string concatenation (`+` operator) can be an alternative to array concatenation, especially when working with strings.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not provide the same level of performance or flexibility as the spread operator and `concat()` methods.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/70.0.3538.102 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 70 on Mac OS X 10.14.1

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.concat	5155637.5 Ops/sec
spread operator	20347670.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator no jQuery (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.concat

spread operator

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):