var data = [
1, 2, 3, 4,
[1, 2, 3, 4],
5, 6, 7, 8,
[1, 2, 3, 4]
];
(function fn(items){
var result = [];
items.forEach(item => {
if(item.pop) {
result.push(fn(item));
} else {
result.push(item);
}
});
return result;
})(data);
(function fn(items){
var result = [];
items.forEach(item => {
if(item.pop) {
result = result.concat(fn(item));
} else {
result.push(item);
}
});
return result;
})(data);
(function fn(items){
var result = [];
items.forEach(item => {
if(item.pop) {
result.push.apply(result, fn(item));
} else {
result.push(item);
}
});
return result;
})(data);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Spread Push | |
Concat Reassign | |
Apply Push |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Spread Push | 3586215.2 Ops/sec |
Concat Reassign | 1724044.4 Ops/sec |
Apply Push | 3462351.0 Ops/sec |
I'll break down the provided benchmark for you.
Benchmark Overview
The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark named "Spread Push VS Concat Reassign". The benchmark compares three different approaches to push elements into an array: using Array.prototype.push()
with the spread operator (...
), Array.prototype.concat()
, and Array.prototype.push.apply()
. Each approach is applied to the same test data, which includes nested arrays.
Test Cases
There are three individual test cases:
...
) to push elements into an array.items.forEach(item => {
if (item.pop) {
result.push(...fn(item));
} else {
result.push(item);
}
});
Array.prototype.concat()
to reassign the result array with new elements pushed by the recursive call fn(item)
.items.forEach(item => {
if (item.pop) {
result = result.concat(fn(item));
} else {
result.push(item);
}
});
Array.prototype.push.apply()
to push elements into an array.items.forEach(item => {
if (item.pop) {
result.push.apply(result, fn(item));
} else {
result.push(item);
}
});
Library Used
None of the test cases explicitly use a JavaScript library. However, it's worth noting that Array.prototype
is a built-in JavaScript API.
Special JS Features/Syntax
The benchmark uses several features and syntax:
...
)...fn(item)
)fn(item)
)forEach
, push
, concat
)Pros and Cons of Each Approach
Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:
Other Alternatives
For this specific benchmark, there aren't many alternative approaches that would change the fundamental comparison between Spread Push and the other two methods. However, if you were to explore other ways to push elements into an array, some alternatives could include:
Array.prototype.set()
_.push()
methodKeep in mind that these alternative approaches might not be as efficient or intuitive as the original three methods.