Benchmark: array test 2 - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

start
const array = [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] const copy = [ 0, ...array ]
end
const array = [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] const copy = [ ...array, 0 ]
push
const array = [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] const copy = [ ...array ] copy.push(0)
unshift
const array = [ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] const copy = [ ...array ] copy.unshift(0)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
start
end
push
unshift

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and its test cases, explaining what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, library usage, special JavaScript features, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The `MeasureThat.net` website provides a platform for creating and running JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided JSON data represents a single benchmark definition with four individual test cases: "start", "end", "push", and "unshift". Each test case measures the performance of copying an array in different ways.

**Test Cases**

1. **"start"**: This test case creates an array `array` with 10 elements, and then uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a copy of the array.
2. **"end"**: Similar to "start", but it appends the element `0` to the end of the copied array using the `push()` method.
3. **"push"**: This test case creates an array `array` with 10 elements, and then uses the spread operator (`...`) to create a copy of the array. It then appends the element `0` to the copied array.
4. **"unshift"**: Similar to "start", but it prepends the element `0` to the beginning of the copied array using the `unshift()` method.

**Comparison**

The benchmark compares the performance of different approaches for copying arrays:

* Spread operator (`...`)
* `push()` method
* `unshift()` method

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Spread Operator (`...`)**:
	* Pros: Fast, efficient, and modern way to create a copy of an array.
	* Cons: May not be supported in older browsers or environments.
2. **`push()` Method**:
	* Pros: Widespread support across different browsers and environments.
	* Cons: Can be slower than the spread operator for large arrays.
3. **`unshift()` Method**:
	* Pros: Suitable for prepending elements to an array, which can be useful in certain scenarios.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient as the spread operator or `push()` method.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage mentioned in the benchmark definition JSON data. However, it's worth noting that some libraries like Lodash or Array.prototype methods may be used in the actual implementation of these test cases.

**Special JavaScript Features**

None of the provided test cases use any special JavaScript features beyond what is standard in modern JavaScript.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses a desktop platform and Chrome 80 as the browser, which might affect the results.
* The `ExecutionsPerSecond` value indicates the number of executions per second for each test case. This can provide insights into the performance of different approaches.
* It's essential to note that microbenchmarks like this one are often used to test specific aspects of an implementation and may not reflect real-world usage scenarios.

**Alternatives**

If you need to benchmark array copying in JavaScript, consider using other alternatives:

1. **Benchmarking libraries**: Tools like Benchmark.js or js-benchmark can help with creating and running microbenchmarks.
2. **Browser-specific APIs**: For specific browser features, you may want to use browser-specific APIs or polyfills to ensure compatibility.
3. **Native Array.prototype methods**: Some browsers or environments might have optimized implementations of Array.prototype methods, which could affect performance.

When choosing an alternative, consider the trade-offs between performance, compatibility, and maintainability for your specific use case.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/80.0.3987.132 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 80 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
start	29369862.0 Ops/sec
end	32132396.0 Ops/sec
push	31634164.0 Ops/sec
unshift	10861999.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

array test 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: start vs end vs push vs unshift

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

start

end

push

unshift

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):