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);
test
var params = [ "hello", true, 7 ]; var arr = [ 1, 2 ]; var other = arr.push(...params);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

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

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three approaches to concatenate an array with another array:

1. `Array.prototype.concat()`
2. The new ES6 spread operator (`...`)
3. jQuery's `$.merge()` function (for older browsers that don't support the spread operator)
4. A custom `push(...)` method

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these four approaches:

* `Array.prototype.concat()`: a traditional method for concatenating arrays
* The new ES6 spread operator (`...`): a concise way to concatenate arrays using the spread syntax
* jQuery's `$.merge()` function: an older method for merging arrays, supported by jQuery but not native JavaScript
* A custom `push(...)` method: a straightforward way to append elements to an array

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here's a brief summary:

* `Array.prototype.concat()`: reliable, widely supported, but can be slower than other methods due to the overhead of calling a method on the prototype.
* The new ES6 spread operator (`...`): concise, efficient, and widely supported in modern browsers. However, it may not work in older browsers or environments that don't support it.
* jQuery's `$.merge()` function: an older method that works in some cases but can be slower than other methods due to the overhead of calling a method on the prototype. It's mostly deprecated in favor of native JavaScript methods.
* Custom `push(...)` method: straightforward, efficient, and widely supported. However, it may not be as concise or readable as other methods.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, jQuery is used for its `$.merge()` function, which is a legacy method that was popular before the spread operator became widely adopted. This suggests that the benchmark is targeting older browsers or environments where jQuery is still relevant.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing different methods for concatenating arrays, which is a fundamental operation in JavaScript programming.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to array concatenation, here are some options:

* Using `Array.prototype.push()` with the spread operator (`...`): e.g., `arr.push(...params)`
* Using a custom implementation of the concatenate method
* Using other libraries or frameworks that provide optimized array concatenation methods (e.g., Lodash)
* Experimenting with different algorithms for concatenating arrays, such as using a loop or recursion.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and compatibility with different browsers and environments.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_12_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/60.0.3112.113 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 60 on Mac OS X 10.12.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.prototype.concat	5955250.0 Ops/sec
spread operator	5062332.5 Ops/sec
jQuery merge	1834189.8 Ops/sec
test	4718246.0 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 vs test

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.prototype.concat

spread operator

jQuery merge

test

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):