Benchmark: for loop vs. lodash range foreach small size

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/2.4.1/lodash.js"></script>

Tests:

for
var x = 0; for (var i = 0; i < 5; i++) { x++; }
lodash range foreach
var x = 0; _.range(5).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array foreach
var x = 0; Array(5).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(Array(5), function (i) { x++; });
lodash range lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(_.range(5), function (i) { x++; });

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

for

175.6M/s

array foreach

92.4M/s

array lodash foreach

84.2M/s

lodash range lodash foreach

66.1M/s

lodash range foreach

64.0M/s

Fastest: for (2.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ for: 175,606,832 ops/sec
• array foreach: 92,410,544 ops/sec
• array lodash foreach: 84,183,016 ops/sec
• lodash range lodash foreach: 66,085,444 ops/sec
• lodash range foreach: 63,976,656 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
lodash range foreach
array foreach
array lodash foreach
lodash range lodash foreach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/91.0.4472.164 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 91 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

for

71.8M/s

array foreach

40.1M/s

array lodash foreach

40.0M/s

lodash range foreach

33.6M/s

lodash range lodash foreach

29.7M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ for	71,776,440 Ops/sec
array foreach	40,088,680 Ops/sec
array lodash foreach	39,958,884 Ops/sec
lodash range foreach	33,604,864 Ops/sec
lodash range lodash foreach	29,736,104 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of four different approaches to iterate over an array:

1. **For loop**: A traditional for loop using a counter variable (`i`) and incrementing it in each iteration.
2. **Lodash `range` + `forEach`**: Lodash is a utility library that provides a range function, which generates an array of numbers within a specified range. The `forEach` method is then used to iterate over this array, executing a callback function for each element.
3. **Array `forEach`**: A built-in JavaScript method that applies a callback function to every element in an array.
4. **Lodash `forEach` + Lodash `range`**: A variation of the previous approach, where Lodash's `forEach` method is used with its own `range` function.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these four approaches under the same conditions:

* Small array size: The arrays used in the benchmark are small, consisting only of 5 elements.
* Consistent code structure: Each approach has similar code structure, making it easier to compare their performance.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **For loop**: A lightweight and straightforward approach, but can be slower due to the overhead of incrementing a variable in each iteration.
2. **Lodash `range` + `forEach`**: Provides a convenient way to generate an array and iterate over it, but introduces additional overhead from the Lodash library and function calls.
3. **Array `forEach`**: A built-in method that is often faster than using a for loop or Lodash's functions, but can be slower due to potential cache misses if not implemented efficiently.
4. **Lodash `forEach` + Lodash `range`**: Similar to the previous approach, but uses two Lodash functions, which may introduce additional overhead.

**Library and Syntax Considerations**

* Lodash: A popular utility library that provides various helper functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more.
* JavaScript's built-in methods: Methods like `Array.prototype.forEach`, `String.prototype.split`, etc. are often faster than using external libraries or custom implementations.

**Special JS Features and Syntax (not applicable in this case)**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are some options:

* Using a `while` loop instead of a for loop.
* Implementing your own iteration logic using `reduce`, `map`, or other array methods.
* Using a library like Ramda or Underscore.js (alternative to Lodash) for functional programming.
* Optimizing the code using techniques like memoization, caching, or parallel processing.

Keep in mind that the performance differences between these approaches may be small and depend on specific use cases and environments.

for loop vs. lodash range foreach small size (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `for vs lodash range foreach vs array foreach vs array lodash foreach vs lodash range lodash foreach`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

for

lodash range foreach

array foreach

array lodash foreach

lodash range lodash foreach

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

for loop vs. lodash range foreach small size (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for vs lodash range foreach vs array foreach vs array lodash foreach vs lodash range lodash foreach

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

for

lodash range foreach

array foreach

array lodash foreach

lodash range lodash foreach

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `for vs lodash range foreach vs array foreach vs array lodash foreach vs lodash range lodash foreach`