Benchmark: splice-vs-sliceconcat-slicespread

Tests:

Splice
const testArray = [1, 2, 3, 4]; testArray.splice(1, 1);
Slice
const testArray = [1, 2, 3, 4]; const newTestArray = testArray.slice(0, 1).concat(testArray.slice(2, testArray.length))
Spread
const testArray = [1, 2, 3, 4]; const newTestArray = [...testArray.slice(0, 1), ...testArray.slice(2, testArray.length)];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Splice
Slice
Spread

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark measures the performance differences between three approaches to modify an array:

1. `splice()`
2. `slice()` + `concat()`
3. `spread` operator (`...`)

These approaches are designed to create a new array by modifying the original one, which is a common use case in JavaScript.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of each approach on an example array `[1, 2, 3, 4]`. The options being compared are:

* `splice()`: Modifies the original array by removing or replacing elements. It returns the number of elements removed or replaced.
* `slice()` + `concat()`: Creates a new array by using `slice()` to extract a subset of elements and then concatenating it with another slice of the same array. This approach creates two intermediate arrays.
* `spread` operator (`...`): Creates a new array by spreading the elements of the original array into a new array.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of each approach:

* `splice()`: Pros: simple, efficient for small modifications. Cons: modifies the original array, can be slow if used incorrectly (e.g., removing too many elements).
* `slice()` + `concat()`: Pros: creates a new array, but uses two intermediate arrays and concatenation, which can be slow. Cons: more memory-intensive than `splice`.
* `spread` operator (`...`): Pros: efficient, creates a new array without modifying the original one. Cons: requires modern JavaScript versions (ECMAScript 2018+) to use.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some implementations of `splice()` or `slice()` might rely on browser-specific libraries or native methods under the hood.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax**

The benchmark uses the spread operator (`...`) which was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). This feature allows creating a new array by spreading elements into it. The benchmark also uses the `const` keyword, which is part of ES6 syntax for declaring constants.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to modify an array, here are a few more:

* `Array.prototype.map()`: Creates a new array with mapped values.
* `Array.prototype.filter()`: Creates a new array with filtered elements.
* Using `Array.from()` or `Array.of()` to create a new array from an iterable or array.

Keep in mind that each approach has its trade-offs in terms of performance, memory usage, and readability. The choice ultimately depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_4) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/76.0.3809.87 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 76 on Mac OS X 10.14.4

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Splice	19259514.0 Ops/sec
Slice	5191065.0 Ops/sec
Spread	11116085.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

splice-vs-sliceconcat-slicespread (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Splice vs Slice vs Spread

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Splice

Slice

Spread

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):