Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
uderscore.each vs jQuery each
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
underscore.each vs jQuery each
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
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>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
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
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
underscore.each
111974.8 Ops/sec
jQuery each
4087887.2 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
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.
Related benchmarks:
lodash.each vs Object.forEach vs jQuery each
lodash.each vs Object.forEach vs jQuery each vs layui each
uderscore each vs jQuery each
uderscorejs (1.13.6) vs jQuery (3.7.1) -- each
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?