var arr1 = ['a', 'b'];
var arr2 = ['c', 'd'];
arr1.concat(arr2);
[arr1, arr2]
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Array.concat() | |
Spread concat |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Array.concat() | 2872663.2 Ops/sec |
Spread concat | 2232480.8 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the provided benchmark and its options.
Benchmark Definition json:
The provided JSON defines a JavaScript microbenchmark with two test cases:
Array.concat()
: This test case measures the performance of the built-in concat()
method for arrays in JavaScript.Spread concat
: This test case measures the performance of the spread operator (...
) when used to concatenate arrays.Options being compared:
The two options being compared are:
concat()
method: The traditional way to concatenate arrays in JavaScript....
): A newer feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) that allows for more concise and expressive array concatenation.Pros and Cons of each approach:
concat()
method:...
):Library usage:
There is no library used in this benchmark. The tests only involve built-in JavaScript functions and operators.
Special JS feature or syntax:
The spread operator (...
) is a special syntax introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It allows for more concise array concatenation, making it a more modern and expressive way to combine arrays.
Other alternatives:
For large-scale array concatenations, other approaches may be considered:
Array.prototype.reduce()
: Instead of using the spread operator or concat()
, you can use reduce()
to concatenate arrays. This approach requires creating a callback function, but can be more efficient for very large datasets.Array.prototype.push()
: You can push elements from one array into another using push()
. However, this method may not be as readable or concise as the spread operator or concat()
.Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and use cases compared to the built-in methods and spread operator.