Benchmark: Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator

Tests:

Array.prototype.concat
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = [ 1, 2 ].concat(params);
spread operator
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ] var other = [ ...[1, 2], ...params ]
jQuery merge
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var other = $.merge([1, 2], params);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.prototype.concat
spread operator
jQuery merge

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 is being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three approaches to concatenate arrays:

1. `Array.prototype.concat()`
2. The new ES6 spread operator (`...`)
3. jQuery's `$merge()` method

**Options Compared**

* **`Array.prototype.concat()`**: a traditional method for concatenating arrays, which creates a new array by copying the elements from both arrays and then assigning it to a new variable.
* **The new ES6 spread operator (`...`)**: a concise way to create a new array by spreading the elements of an existing array into a new array. This method is more efficient than `concat()` because it avoids creating a temporary array.
* **jQuery's `$merge()` method**: a utility function provided by jQuery that concatenates arrays.

**Pros and Cons**

* **`Array.prototype.concat()`**:
	+ Pros: widely supported, easy to understand, and widely used.
	+ Cons: creates a new array, which can be inefficient for large datasets.
* **The new ES6 spread operator (`...`)**:
	+ Pros: concise, efficient, and supports modern browsers.
	+ Cons: may not work in older browsers, and some developers might find it less intuitive than `concat()`.
* **jQuery's `$merge()` method**:
	+ Pros: widely supported by jQuery users, easy to use for those familiar with jQuery.
	+ Cons: adds an extra dependency (jQuery), and the implementation can be slower due to additional overhead.

**Library**

The benchmark uses jQuery, a popular JavaScript library that provides a wide range of utility functions for manipulating HTML documents. In this case, the `$merge()` method is used to concatenate arrays.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None of the tested methods rely on any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond ES6 spread operator (`...`), which is a standard feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

* Using `Array.prototype.push()` and assigning the result to a new variable.
* Using `Array.concat()` from the `Array` constructor (not to be confused with the prototype method).
* Using native array methods like `flat()`, which can concatenate arrays.
* Using other libraries or frameworks that provide similar concatenation functions.

Keep in mind that the performance differences between these approaches may vary depending on the specific use case and browser/JavaScript environment.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:57.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/57.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 57 on Mac OS X 10.12

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.concat	9917406.0 Ops/sec
spread operator	21109684.0 Ops/sec
jQuery merge	13684191.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Array.prototype.concat vs spread operator (version: 0)

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

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

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.concat

spread operator

jQuery merge

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):