const arr = [Array(10000).keys()];
const arrClone = arr.slice();
const arr = [Array(10000).keys()];
const arrClone = [arr];
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Slice | |
Spread |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Slice | 2902.9 Ops/sec |
Spread | 3017.0 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the JavaScript microbenchmark and explain what's being tested.
Benchmark Definition
The benchmark definition is not provided in the given JSON, but we can infer its purpose from the test cases.
Two main approaches are compared:
slice()
method to create a shallow copy of an array....
) to create a new array with a copy of the original array.Options Compared
The two options are being tested for their performance, specifically:
Pros and Cons of Each Approach
Library Usage
There doesn't appear to be any specific library being used in this benchmark.
Special JS Features/Syntax
The use of the spread operator (...
) in Array Spread is a relatively recent feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It allows for creating new arrays with a copy of the original array's elements. This syntax is widely supported across modern browsers and environments, but older versions may not recognize it.
Other Considerations
Alternatives
Other alternatives for creating a copy of an array could include:
Array.prototype.slice.call()
(or simply .slice()
)Array.from()
with an empty array ([]
) as the initial argumentnew Array(size)
followed by fill()
to create an array of specified sizeHowever, these alternatives might not be as efficient or readable as using the spread operator for large datasets.
In summary, this benchmark compares two approaches to creating a copy of an array: Array Slice and Array Spread. The spread operator is likely preferred due to its efficiency and modern syntax, but its usage may not work across all browsers or environments.