Benchmark: spread vs push set creation 2

Tests:

spread
const a = [1,2,3]; const b = [4,5,6]; new Set([...a, ...b]);
push
const a = [1,2,3]; const b = [4,5,6]; const c = a; c.push(b); new Set(c);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
spread
push

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's happening in the provided benchmark and explain the options being compared.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for creating a new Set object from an array:

1. Using the spread operator (`...`) to create a new array with elements from both arrays, and then passing that array to `Set`.
2. Creating a reference to one of the original arrays (`a` or `c`) and pushing the other array into it before passing it to `Set`.

**Options Being Compared**

Option 1: Spread Operator (`...`)
--------------------------------

* Pros:
	+ More concise and readable code
	+ Works with most JavaScript versions, including older ones
* Cons:
	+ May incur a performance overhead due to the creation of a new array
	+ Can be slower for very large arrays

Option 2: Push (`c.push(b)`)
-----------------------------

* Pros:
	+ May be faster for very large arrays, as it avoids creating a new array
	+ Can be more efficient in terms of memory usage
* Cons:
	+ More verbose and less readable code
	+ Only works with newer JavaScript versions (ES6+) that support array literals

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's worth noting that the `Set` data structure is a built-in part of JavaScript, so there isn't a separate library to consider.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The benchmark uses the following special features/syntax:

* Spread operator (`...`) which was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6)
* Template literals (`\r\n`) for multi-line string concatenation
* Array literals (`[1,2,3]`, `[4,5,6]`) which are a feature of JavaScript since its early days

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the trade-offs between readability, performance, and memory usage. If readability is important, using the spread operator might be a better choice. However, if performance is critical for very large arrays or in situations where every millisecond counts, the push approach might be a better option.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring other alternatives, here are a few options:

* Using `Array.prototype.concat()` to concatenate arrays before passing them to `Set`.
* Using `Array.prototype.push.apply()` to add elements from one array to another, followed by passing the resulting array to `Set`.
* Comparing performance with different JavaScript engines or versions.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as efficient as the push approach for very large arrays, and may have a higher overhead due to function calls or object creation.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.150 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
spread	2033948.4 Ops/sec
push	3259990.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

spread vs push set creation 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: spread vs push

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

spread

push

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):