Benchmark: lodash.each vs Object.forEach

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:

native
arr.forEach(fn);
for loop
for(i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) { fn(arr[i]); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
native
for loop

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data for the benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches to iterate over an array: `Object.forEach` and a traditional `for` loop.

**Options Compared**

1. **`Object.forEach`**: This is a built-in JavaScript method that allows you to execute a function once for each element in an array.
2. **Traditional `for` loop**: This approach uses a manual index variable (`i`) to iterate over the array elements.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* `Object.forEach`:
	+ Pros: More concise, eliminates the need to manually increment an index variable.
	+ Cons: May incur additional overhead due to the function invocation mechanism.
* Traditional `for` loop:
	+ Pros: Can be more efficient if the loop body is simple and doesn't require many function calls.
	+ Cons: Requires manual indexing, which can lead to errors.

**Library Used**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided JSON data. However, it's likely that the benchmark uses the built-in `forEach` method on the `Array.prototype`, which is a part of the JavaScript standard library.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark utilizes the `for...of` loop syntax (not explicitly used in this case), but also relies on the `forEach` method and traditional `for` loops, which are common features in JavaScript. There's no specific ES6+ feature mentioned in the provided data.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to implement a custom iterator or use a third-party library for iteration, alternative approaches could include:

* Using `Symbol.iterator` with a custom iterator object
* Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Ramda for functional programming and array manipulation

Keep in mind that these alternatives are not mentioned in the provided JSON data.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The script preparation code populates an array (`arr`) with 1000 elements, each containing an integer value. A function `fn` is defined to perform a simple transformation on the input value (doubling and multiplying by 5).

The HTML preparation code is empty, suggesting that no additional setup or modifications are required for this specific benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

Two test cases are provided:

1. **`native`**: Tests the performance of `Object.forEach`.
2. **`for loop`**: Tests the performance of a traditional `for` loop.

These test cases illustrate the difference in execution speed between using built-in methods like `forEach` versus manual indexing and looping.

Related benchmarks:

lodash.each vs Object.forEach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: native vs for loop

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

native

for loop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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