Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
fill vs for loop
(version: 0)
fill vs for
Comparing performance of:
fill vs for
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
fill
const arr = new Array(100000).fill().map((_,i) => (i))
for
const arr = []; for (let i = 0; i < 100000; i++) { arr.push(i); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
fill
for
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'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its various aspects. **What is being tested?** The benchmark compares two approaches to populate an array with 100,000 elements: using the `Array.prototype.fill()` method followed by `map()`, and using a traditional `for` loop. **Options compared** There are two options being compared: 1. **fill**: This option uses the `Array.prototype.fill()` method followed by `map()` to populate the array. 2. **for**: This option uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over an index range and push elements onto the array. **Pros and Cons of each approach** **Fill:** Pros: * More concise and expressive code * Can be faster due to the optimized implementation of `Array.prototype.fill()` in modern browsers * Less prone to errors, as it's a single method call Cons: * May not work correctly in older browsers that don't support `fill()` * Requires a second method call to create an array, which may incur additional overhead **For:** Pros: * Works correctly in all browsers and environments * Allows for more fine-grained control over the iteration process * No dependency on modern browser features Cons: * More verbose code * May be slower due to the overhead of the loop and push operations **Other considerations** Both approaches have their trade-offs, but the `fill()` method is generally preferred due to its conciseness and optimized implementation. However, if you need to support older browsers or require more control over the iteration process, the traditional `for` loop may be a better choice. **Library usage** The benchmark uses the `Array.prototype.fill()` method, which is a part of the JavaScript standard library. The `fill()` method is used to set all elements of an array to a specified value, in this case, creating an array filled with undefined values. The subsequent call to `map()` is used to transform each element of the array into its index. **Special JS feature or syntax** The benchmark uses JavaScript's array methods and loops. No special features or syntax are required for this benchmark, making it accessible to a wide range of developers. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for populating an array include: * Using `Array.from()` method, which creates a new array from an iterable. * Using the spread operator (`[...new Array(100000)]`) to create an array filled with undefined values. * Using a library like Lodash, which provides a `fill` function. However, these alternatives may not be suitable for all use cases or environments, and the traditional `for` loop remains a reliable option.
Related benchmarks:
Array fill foreach, vs for i loop
Array fill method vs for loop_
Array fill method vs for loop__
Array fill map, vs for i loop
Array fill vs for i loop
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?