Benchmark: concat vs spread1

Tests:

Array.prototype.concat
var array1 = [ "hello", true, 7, { something: 'yes'} ]; var array2 = [ "hello again", false, 71, { something: 'no'} ]; var other = array1.concat(array2);
spread operator
var array1 = [ "hello", true, 7, { something: 'yes'} ]; var array2 = [ "hello again", false, 71, { something: 'no'} ]; var other = [...array1, ...array2];

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

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.80 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 86 on Mac OS X 10.14.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.concat	1046956.5 Ops/sec
spread operator	14794527.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Explanation**

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

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Traditional `concat()` method**: This is an older way of concatenating arrays in JavaScript.
2. **ES6 spread operator (`...`)**: This is a newer, more concise way of concatenating arrays introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Pros and Cons**

**Traditional `concat()` method**:

Pros:

* Wide support across browsers and older versions
* Easy to understand and use for many developers

Cons:

* Can be slower than the spread operator due to its overhead
* Returns a new array, which can lead to increased memory usage

**ES6 spread operator (`...`)**:

Pros:

* Faster execution speed compared to `concat()`
* More concise and expressive syntax
* Efficiently creates a new array without copying data from the original arrays

Cons:

* Requires support for ES6 syntax and modern browsers
* Can be less intuitive for developers unfamiliar with it

**Library Usage**

In the benchmark, neither library is explicitly mentioned. However, it's worth noting that libraries like Lodash or Underscore.js might provide alternative implementations of array concatenation methods.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The spread operator (`...`) is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ES6 (ECMAScript 2015). It allows creating new arrays from existing arrays or other iterables by spreading elements into an array literal.

In this benchmark, the spread operator is used to concatenate two arrays: `array1` and `array2`.

**Other Alternatives**

Besides the traditional `concat()` method and the ES6 spread operator (`...`), other alternatives for array concatenation include:

* `Array.prototype.push()`: Appends elements to an existing array and returns the new length of the array.
* `Array.prototype.concat()` (as used in this benchmark)
* `Array.from()` with `concat()` (e.g., `Array.from(array1).concat(array2)`)
* Using a library like Lodash's `_.union()` or Underscore.js's `_.concat()` for more concise and expressive syntax.

These alternatives may offer varying trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and compatibility across different browsers and environments.

Related benchmarks:

concat vs spread1 (version: 0)

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

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

Created: 4 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 one month ago):