Benchmark: for vs $.each - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script
  src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.1.1.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = [{"code":"CashDrop","name":"CashDrop","jackpot":"212515.97"},{"code":"ChainReactors","name":"Chain Reactors","jackpot":"147816.97"},{"code":"HockeyReactors","name":"Hockey Reactors","jackpot":"147816.97"},{"code":"JokerJackpot","name":"Joker Jackpot","jackpot":"124998.27"},{"code":"FeatheredFrenzy","name":"Feathered Frenzy","jackpot":"120761.50"},{"code":"SuperCubes","name":"SuperCubes","jackpot":"115456.40"},{"code":"RockyReactors","name":"Rocky Reactors","jackpot":"101007.75"},{"code":"RobinHood20E3bProg","name":"Robin Hood 20 Line","jackpot":"58626.07"},{"code":"Diamonds","name":"Diamonds","jackpot":"58082.31"},{"code":"MonteCarloBillions20E3bProg","name":"Monte Carlo Billions 20 Line","jackpot":"57359.58"},{"code":"ChineseNewYear20E3bProg","name":"Chinese New Year 20 Line","jackpot":"55510.94"},{"code":"MrMultiplier","name":"Mr Multiplier","jackpot":"53931.57"},{"code":"BingoReactors","name":"Bingo Reactors","jackpot":"33918.47"},{"code":"SuperCars20E5bProg","name":"Super Cars 20 Line","jackpot":"26336.89"},{"code":"BattleshipAtlantic20E4fProg","name":"Battle of the Atlantic 20 Line","jackpot":"25044.10"},{"code":"BigTop20E4fProg","name":"Big Top Extravaganza 20","jackpot":"25044.10"},{"code":"RumbleInTheJungle","name":"Rumble in the Jungle","jackpot":"22001.45"},{"code":"WizardOfOddsSlot","name":"Wizard of Odds","jackpot":"20064.91"},{"code":"NotreDame","name":"Notre Dame","jackpot":"20003.99"},{"code":"VegasNights20E4aProg","name":"Vegas Nights 20 Line","jackpot":"16931.70"},{"code":"MonsterCarlo9Prog1","name":"Monster Carlo 9 Line","jackpot":"11019.40"},{"code":"CashMachine","name":"Cash Machine","jackpot":"10549.33"},{"code":"PlumRoyale20E4bProg","name":"Astro Fruit 20 Line","jackpot":"10346.64"},{"code":"ChainReactorsTrails","name":"Chain Reactors Super Trails","jackpot":"6849.50"},{"code":"RoadTrip20E4dProg","name":"Road Trip 20 Line","jackpot":"6820.21"},{"code":"BingoSlot20E4dProg","name":"Bingo Slot 20 Line","jackpot":"6820.21"},{"code":"ChainReactors100","name":"Chain Reactors 100","jackpot":"6148.82"},{"code":"TumblingTreasures","name":"Tumblin' Treasures","jackpot":"5000.10"},{"code":"HeavenAndHell","name":"Heaven And Hell 9 Line","jackpot":"3693.45"},{"code":"DeadMansChest","name":"Dead Man's Chest 1 Line","jackpot":"38.60"},{"code":"MonsterCarlo","name":"Monster Carlo 1 Line","jackpot":"1.80"}];

Tests:

for
for(var i = 0, len = data.length; i < len; i++) { var jackpot = '$' + data[i].jackpot + '.' + data[i].jackpot + ''; }
jquery each
$.each(data, function() { var jackpot = '$' + this.jackpot + '.' + this.jackpot + ''; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
jquery each

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definitions and explain what is tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The two benchmark definitions are for `for` loop and `$ .each` method (part of jQuery library).

1. **For Loop**:
```javascript
for(var i = 0, len = data.length; i < len; i++) {
 var jackpot = '$' + data[i].jackpot + '.' + data[i].jackpot + '';
}
```
This benchmark tests the performance of a traditional `for` loop. The loop iterates over the `data` array and constructs a string for each element's jackpot.

**$ .each Method (jQuery)**:
```javascript
$.each(data, function() {
 var jackpot = '$' + this.jackpot + '.' + this.jackpot + '';
});
```
This benchmark tests the performance of the `$ .each` method. The method iterates over the `data` array and calls a callback function for each element, which constructs a string for its jackpot.

**Comparison**

The two benchmarks compare the performance of traditional looping (for loop) versus jQuery's `$ .each` method.

**Pros and Cons**

**For Loop**

Pros:

* Familiarity: Most developers are familiar with traditional `for` loops.
* Control: The developer has full control over the loop iteration.

Cons:

* Boilerplate code: The loop requires manual initialization, increment, and termination.
* Performance overhead: Modern engines might incur a slight performance penalty due to the extra overhead of manual loop management.

**$ .each Method (jQuery)**

Pros:

* Abstraction: jQuery provides an abstracted way to iterate over arrays, reducing boilerplate code.
* Performance: jQuery's engine can optimize iterations and reduce overhead compared to traditional loops.

Cons:

* Dependence on external library: The developer needs to include jQuery in their project, which might add size and complexity.
* Less control: The developer has limited control over the loop iteration, as it's managed by jQuery.

**Other Considerations**

* **DOM manipulation**: Both benchmarks construct a string for each jackpot, which involves DOM manipulation. However, the `$ .each` method is more concise and might be faster due to its optimized engine.
* **Array length**: The array length is fixed at 20 elements in this benchmark. As the array grows or shrinks, performance differences between the two approaches may become more pronounced.

**Alternative Approaches**

1. **Lodash's `forEach` method**: Lodash provides a similar abstraction to jQuery's `$ .each` method. It can be used as an alternative for comparing performance.
2. **ES6 `for...of` loop**: This is another traditional looping approach that can be compared to the `for` loop benchmark.
3. **Native Array.prototype.forEach()**: Most modern browsers support the native `forEach()` method, which can be used instead of jQuery's `$ .each` method.

Keep in mind that performance differences between these approaches might vary depending on specific use cases, array sizes, and browser implementations.

Related benchmarks:

for vs $.each (version: 5)

Comparing performance of: for vs jquery each

Created: 9 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

for

jquery each

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):