Benchmark: slice().splice(low, howmany) vs slice(low, low + howmany)

Script Preparation code:

var total = 1000;
var low = 50;
var howmany = 10;
var data = new Array(total).fill(undefined).map((_, i) => i);

Tests:

slice().splice(low, howmany)
var page = data.slice().splice(low, howmany);
slice(low, low + howmany)
var page = data.slice(low, low + howmany)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
slice().splice(low, howmany)
slice(low, low + howmany)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its options.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to test the performance of two different methods for creating a subset of an array in JavaScript:

1. `slice().splice(low, howmany)`
2. `slice(low, low + howmany)`

**Options Compared**

These two options differ in their approach:

* `slice().splice(low, howmany)`:
	+ Creates a new slice of the original array using the `slice()` method.
	+ Then, uses the `splice()` method to remove elements from the new slice, starting from index `low` and removing `howmany` number of elements.
* `slice(low, low + howmany)`: This approach is similar to `slice().splice()`, but instead of creating a separate slice and then modifying it, it creates a new array with a fixed length (`low + howmany`) and assigns its content directly.

**Pros and Cons**

**`slice().splice(low, howmany)`**:

Pros:

* More intuitive for many developers, as it's more similar to traditional array methods.
* Can be easier to understand and maintain for complex scenarios.

Cons:

* Creates a new slice of the original array, which can lead to unnecessary memory allocation.
* Involves an extra function call (`splice()`), which might incur overhead due to method lookup and invocation.

**`slice(low, low + howmany)`**:

Pros:

* More efficient in terms of memory usage, as it creates a single array with the desired length instead of creating a separate slice.
* Avoids the overhead of an extra function call (`splice()`).

Cons:

* Can be less intuitive for developers unfamiliar with this syntax or method.
* May lead to confusion when trying to understand the intent behind using `slice()` in conjunction with indexing.

**Library Used**

There is no library used explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's likely that a JavaScript engine implementation (e.g., V8) provides an optimized version of these methods under the hood, which might influence the performance differences observed between the two options.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None are explicitly mentioned in the provided benchmark definition.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/75.0.3770.100 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 75 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
slice().splice(low, howmany)	8315.0 Ops/sec
slice(low, low + howmany)	656475.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

slice().splice(low, howmany) vs slice(low, low + howmany) (version: 0)

Checking performance between slice().splice(low, howmany) and slice(low, low + howmany)

Comparing performance of: slice().splice(low, howmany) vs slice(low, low + howmany)

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

slice().splice(low, howmany)

slice(low, low + howmany)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):