Benchmark: .at vs [x] - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var k = new Array(10000).fill(Math.random()*1000).map(e=>(Math.random()*1000));

Tests:

x[0]
return k[0];
x.at(0)
return k.at(0);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
x[0]
x.at(0)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to accessing an element at a specific index in an array: using square bracket notation (`x[0]`) versus the `at()` method (introduced in ECMAScript 2022).

**Options Compared**

There are two test cases:

1. `x[0]`: Uses traditional square bracket notation to access the first element of the array.
2. `x.at(0)`: Uses the `at()` method to access the first element of the array.

**Pros and Cons**

**`x[0]`**

Pros:

* Widely supported across older browsers and environments, where the `at()` method might not be available.
* Simple and easy to implement.

Cons:

* May lead to slower performance due to the need for iterating over the array elements using bracket notation.

**`x.at(0)`**

Pros:

* Offers better performance and efficiency compared to traditional bracket notation, especially in modern browsers that support the `at()` method.
* More readable code, as it explicitly conveys the intent of accessing an element at a specific index.

Cons:

* Requires support for the `at()` method, which might not be available in older browsers or environments.
* May require additional work to implement and ensure compatibility across different platforms.

**Library: Array.prototype.at()**

The `at()` method is a part of the ECMAScript standard (ES2022) that allows accessing elements at specific indices using a more readable syntax. The library uses this method to compare the performance difference between traditional bracket notation and the new `at()` method.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax: none mentioned**

Since there's no mention of special JavaScript features or syntax in this benchmark, we can assume it focuses solely on the array access comparison.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to test other aspects of array access, you could consider adding more test cases, such as:

* Using `indexOf()` and then accessing the element at that index.
* Comparing performance with different array sizes or data types (e.g., strings, objects).
* Testing error handling scenarios, like trying to access an index out of bounds.

By expanding on this benchmark, you can create a more comprehensive test suite for array access methods in JavaScript.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/102.0.4972.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 102 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
x[0]	13795843.0 Ops/sec
x.at(0)	6426286.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

.at vs [x] (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: x[0] vs x.at(0)

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

x[0]

x.at(0)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):