Benchmark: uderscore.each vs jQuery each

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script src="http://underscorejs.ru/underscore.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:


// Populate the base array
var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
  arr[i] = i;
}

function fn(a) {
  return a * 2 * 5;
}

Tests:

underscore.each
_.forEach(arr,fn)
jQuery each
$.each(fn);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
underscore.each
jQuery each

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/128.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 128 on Android

View result in a separate tab

jQuery each

4.1M/s

underscore.each

112K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ jQuery each	4,087,887 Ops/sec
underscore.each	111,975 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its results.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two JavaScript libraries: Underscore.js (specifically, its `forEach` method) and jQuery's `each` method.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Underscore.js `forEach`**: This method iterates over an array using a callback function.
2. **jQuery `each`**: This method also iterates over an array using a callback function, but it's part of the jQuery library.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Both libraries have their strengths and weaknesses:

* Underscore.js `forEach`:
	+ Pros: Lightweight, flexible, and fast.
	+ Cons: Requires knowledge of Underscore.js syntax and APIs.
* jQuery `each`:
	+ Pros: Widely adopted, well-documented, and easy to use for jQuery developers.
	+ Cons: Larger footprint (due to jQuery's overall size), and might be overkill for small projects.

**Library Descriptions**

1. **Underscore.js**: A lightweight JavaScript utility library that provides functional programming helpers, including `forEach`, `map`, `filter`, and more.
2. **jQuery**: A popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation, event handling, and Ajax interactions. jQuery's `each` method is used to iterate over arrays.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The benchmark doesn't use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require specific knowledge or expertise.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to compare the performance of other iteration methods in JavaScript, consider:

* `Array.prototype.forEach`: The built-in JavaScript method for iterating over arrays using a callback function.
* Vanilla JavaScript loops (e.g., `for`, `while`, or `do-while`) for manual iteration.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided script preparation code creates an array of 1000 elements, each containing an index value. It also defines a simple function `fn(a)` that takes an input and returns the result of multiplying it by 2 and 5.

The HTML preparation code includes links to load jQuery and Underscore.js libraries.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case compares the performance of either Underscore.js `forEach` or jQuery's `each` method on the same array, with the same input function (`fn(a)`). The tests are designed to be independent, allowing for accurate comparison of their execution times.

uderscore.each vs jQuery each (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `underscore.each vs jQuery each`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

underscore.each

jQuery each

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

uderscore.each vs jQuery each (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: underscore.each vs jQuery each

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

underscore.each

jQuery each

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: `underscore.each vs jQuery each`