Benchmark: Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator1234321

Tests:

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

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.slice
spread operator

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark compares two approaches for creating a copy of an array:

1. The traditional `Array.prototype.slice()` method.
2. The new ES6 spread operator (`[ ...params ]`).

**What are the options being compared?**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches in creating a shallow copy of an array.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **`Array.prototype.slice()`**:
	+ Pros:
		- Widely supported across browsers and JavaScript engines.
		- Well-established and understood by developers.
	+ Cons:
		- Can be slower than the spread operator for large arrays due to the overhead of calling a method on an array.
* **Spread Operator (`[ ...params ]`)**:
	+ Pros:
		- Newer and faster approach compared to `slice()`.
		- Provides a more concise way of creating copies of arrays.
	+ Cons:
		- Not yet widely supported across browsers and JavaScript engines (although it's gaining popularity).
		- May not work as expected in older versions of Firefox or other browsers.

**Library:**
In this benchmark, the `Array.prototype.slice()` method is a built-in part of the ECMAScript specification. The spread operator (`[ ...params ]`) is also a built-in feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**
There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark, as it only involves comparing two well-established approaches.

**Other Considerations:**

* The benchmark does not account for the case where the original array is modified while the copy is being used. In such cases, using `slice()` might be more suitable to avoid potential issues.
* The spread operator might not work correctly with arrays containing non-primitive values (e.g., objects or functions) due to its shallow copying nature.

**Alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternative ways to create copies of arrays in JavaScript, some other options include:

1. `Array.from()`: Creates a new array from an iterable object, which can be used with arrays.
2. `Array.prototype.concat()`: Concatenates one or more arrays into a new array, creating a deep copy by default (although it's not as efficient as the spread operator).
3. Third-party libraries like Lodash (`_.clone()`), Underscore (`_.clone()`), or other array utilities.

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives has its own trade-offs and considerations, depending on your specific use case and requirements.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/68.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 68 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.slice	15912448.0 Ops/sec
spread operator	17735262.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Array.prototype.slice vs spread operator1234321 (version: 0)

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

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

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.slice

spread operator

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):