Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
HEY YOOasa
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
For of vs reduce
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
For of
var arr = [{id: 1, price: 50}, {id: 2, price: 100}]; let sum = 0; for(let product of arr) { sum += product.price; }
reduce
var arr = [{id: 1, price: 50}, {id: 2, price: 100}]; arr.reduce((acc, item) => { return acc + item.price; }, 0)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
For of
reduce
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):
I'll break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is missing in the provided JSON. A typical benchmark definition would include information about the test case, such as the input data, expected output, or specific requirements for the test. **Individual Test Cases** There are two individual test cases: 1. **For of**: This test case uses a simple array with two elements and calculates the sum of their prices using a `for...of` loop. ```javascript var arr = [{id: 1, price: 50}, {id: 2, price: 100}]; let sum = 0; for(let product of arr) { sum += product.price; } ``` **Comparison Options** In this test case, the `for...of` loop is compared to a traditional `for` loop. The comparison is likely done by executing both loops and measuring their execution time. Pros of using `for...of`: * More concise and readable code * Less error-prone than traditional `for` loops Cons of using `for...of`: * May not be as performance-efficient due to the overhead of iterating over the array elements * Limited control over iteration variables (e.g., index) Pros of traditional `for` loops: * More control over iteration variables and loop behavior * Can be more efficient in certain cases Cons of using traditional `for` loops: * Less concise and less readable code * More error-prone due to the need to manually manage iteration variables **Library Usage** There is no explicit library usage in this test case. **Special JS Features or Syntax** None mentioned, but it's worth noting that `for...of` loops are a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). **Other Considerations** * The benchmark might be sensitive to the specific array implementation used by the browser. Different browsers may optimize their array implementations differently. * The execution time measured by the benchmark might not reflect the actual performance of the code in real-world scenarios, as it's only executed under controlled conditions. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for testing iteration performance could include: * Using a different data structure, such as a linked list or a custom array implementation * Adding additional iterations or nested loops to simulate more complex logic * Testing with different input sizes or shapes to see how the code scales * Comparing the results of other iteration methods, such as `forEach` or `map`, against `for...of` and traditional `for` loops.
Related benchmarks:
Search
Deep merge lodash vs ramda vs deepmerge - concat arrays
Deep merge lodash vs ramda vs deepmerge vs json clone
Deep merge lodash 4.6.2 vs ramda vs deepmerge
Deep merge lodash vs ramda vs deepmerge vs json clone 3
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?