Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash forEach vs pure for i loop vs pure forEach
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lodash.forEach vs native for vs native forEach
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>
Script Preparation code:
var values = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}]
Tests:
lodash.forEach
var count = 0; _.forEach(values, function(v,i) { if (v.a != null) { count++; } })
native for
var count = 0; for (var i = 0; i < values.length; i++) { if (values[i].a != null) { count++; } }
native forEach
var count = 0; values.forEach(function(v,i) { if (v.a != null) { count++; } })
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lodash.forEach
native for
native forEach
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
gemma2:9b
, generated one year ago):
This benchmark compares the performance of three different ways to iterate over an array in JavaScript and count elements that meet a specific condition: **Options Compared:** 1. **`lodash.forEach`**: This uses the `forEach` method from the Lodash library, a popular utility library for JavaScript. - **Pros**: Lodash offers convenient functions like `forEach` with consistent syntax across different JavaScript environments. It can simplify code and potentially improve readability. - **Cons**: Adding an external dependency like Lodash can increase bundle size and potentially slow down initial page load if not optimized properly. 2. **`native for` loop**: This uses the traditional `for` loop in plain JavaScript. - **Pros**: No external dependencies, native to JavaScript, generally performant. - **Cons**: Can sometimes be more verbose than other options. Requires manual index management. 3. **`native forEach`**: This uses the built-in `forEach` method available on arrays in JavaScript. - **Pros**: Concise syntax, efficient, no external dependencies. - **Cons**: Less flexible than a `for` loop if you need to modify the iteration behavior based on specific conditions. **Other Considerations:** * **Specific Condition**: The benchmark counts elements where `v.a != null`. This could be a simple check in real-world scenarios, but more complex operations within the loop will significantly affect performance. * **Array Size**: The results are likely to change drastically with larger arrays. * **Browser/Environment**: Performance can vary based on the JavaScript engine and browser being used. The provided benchmark results show Chrome 104 as the tested environment. **Alternatives:** * **`for...of` loop (Modern JavaScript)**: Introduced in ES6, this loop provides a more readable and concise way to iterate over iterable objects (like arrays) without needing an index. * **Libraries like `Ramda` or `Immutable.js`**: These libraries offer functional programming paradigms with efficient iteration and data manipulation techniques that can be faster than traditional approaches for certain tasks. Let me know if you have any more questions about JavaScript benchmarking or specific aspects of this benchmark!
Related benchmarks:
lodash.each vs Object.forEach vs Native for
Lodash foreach vs native foreach
lodash forEach vs for i loop modified
lodash .foreach vs native foreach vs native forof
lodash .foreach vs native foreach vs native for loop
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?