Benchmark: every vs for loop

Tests:

every
const a = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]; const b = [1, 2, 4, 5, 3, 5]; a.every(x => b.some(y => x === y));
for loop
const a = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]; const b = [1, 2, 4, 5, 3, 5]; for (let i = 0, l = a.length; i < l; i++) { if (!b.some(y => a[i] === y)) { break; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
every
for loop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/145.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 145 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
every	105017464.0 Ops/sec
for loop	30818920.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: `every` and `for loop`. The goal is to determine which approach is faster for testing if all elements in an array match certain conditions.

**What is tested?**

In this benchmark, we have a script that defines two arrays: `a` and `b`. We then use the `every` method on `a` and check if each element matches any element in `b` using the `some` method. The `for loop` approach manually iterates over the elements of `a` and checks for matches with `b`.

**Options compared**

The two approaches being tested are:

1. **Every**: This is a built-in JavaScript method that returns `true` if all elements in an array pass the test implemented by the provided function.
2. **For loop**: This approach uses a manual loop to iterate over the elements of the first array and checks for matches with the second array.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Every**:
	+ Pros: Concise, readable, and easy to maintain.
	+ Cons: May not be as efficient as the `for loop` approach since it involves creating a function to test each element.
* **For loop**:
	+ Pros: Can be optimized for specific use cases or performance-critical code paths.
	+ Cons: More verbose and error-prone compared to the concise syntax of `every`.

**Library usage**

In this benchmark, no external libraries are used. The only built-in JavaScript features utilized are:

* `Array.prototype.every`
* `Array.prototype.some`

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None.

**Other considerations**

When writing performance-critical code, consider the following:

* Use `every` and `some` when you need to test multiple conditions on arrays.
* For more complex logic, use a custom function with `every`.
* If you're optimizing for specific browsers or platforms, choose an approach that's more compatible with those environments.

**Alternatives**

If you want to compare other approaches, consider:

1. **Map**: Instead of using `every` and `some`, you could use the `map` method to create a new array with transformed elements.
2. **Filter**: Use `filter` instead of `for loop` or `every`.
3. **Regex**: If you're only checking for specific patterns, consider using regular expressions.

Keep in mind that each approach has its pros and cons, and the best choice depends on your specific use case and performance requirements.

Related benchmarks:

every vs for loop (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: every vs for loop

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

every

for loop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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