Benchmark: for loop vs. lodash v4.17.21 range foreach

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>

Tests:

for
var x = 0; for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { x++; }
lodash range foreach
var x = 0; _.range(10000).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array foreach
var x = 0; Array(10000).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(Array(10000), function (i) { x++; });
lodash range lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(_.range(10000), function (i) { x++; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
lodash range foreach
array foreach
array lodash foreach
lodash range lodash foreach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

for

174K/s

array foreach

23K/s

lodash range foreach

18K/s

lodash range lodash foreach

6K/s

array lodash foreach

5K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ for	173,789 Ops/sec
array foreach	23,088 Ops/sec
lodash range foreach	17,512 Ops/sec
lodash range lodash foreach	5,792 Ops/sec
array lodash foreach	5,459 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test measures the performance of three different approaches to iterate over an array:

1. **Native `for` loop**: A traditional `for` loop with manual incrementing.
2. **Lodash `.range()` method followed by `.forEach()`**: Lodash is a utility library that provides various functions for iterating over arrays. In this case, it uses the `.range()` method to generate an array of numbers and then applies the `.forEach()` method to iterate over each element.
3. **Array `.forEach()` method**: Another way to iterate over an array using the `forEach` method.

**Comparison Options**

The benchmark compares these three approaches:

* **Native `for` loop**: This is a traditional, manual approach that relies on the developer's knowledge of the loop mechanics.
* **Lodash `.range()` method followed by `.forEach()`**: This uses Lodash to simplify the iteration process. The `.range()` method generates an array of numbers, and then the `.forEach()` method applies the callback function (in this case, incrementing `x`) to each element.
* **Array `.forEach()` method**: A more concise approach that eliminates the need for manual loop management.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary:

1. **Native `for` loop**:
	* Pros: Simple, well-established technique; can be used in many contexts beyond this specific benchmark.
	* Cons: Requires manual incrementing, which can lead to errors or performance issues if not done correctly.
2. **Lodash `.range()` method followed by `.forEach()`**:
	* Pros: Simplifies iteration and reduces boilerplate code; provides a consistent API for array iteration.
	* Cons: Adds an external dependency (Lodash), which may be overkill for some use cases.
3. **Array `.forEach()` method**:
	* Pros: Concise, easy to read, and well-established; eliminates manual loop management.
	* Cons: Limited control over the iteration process; can be slower due to the overhead of JavaScript's built-in methods.

**Lodash Library**

In this benchmark, Lodash is used as a utility library for array manipulation. The `.range()` method generates an array of numbers, and the `.forEach()` method applies the callback function to each element. This simplifies the iteration process but introduces an external dependency.

**Other Considerations**

* **Code readability**: The `for` loop requires manual incrementing, which can lead to code clutter. In contrast, the other two approaches use concise methods that make the code easier to read.
* **Performance overhead**: JavaScript's built-in methods (e.g., `.forEach()`) may introduce performance overhead due to their overhead and caching mechanisms. Manual loops can be faster but require more developer knowledge.

**Alternatives**

If you need to iterate over arrays in JavaScript, consider using:

1. **Native `for...of` loop**: A more modern approach that eliminates manual incrementing.
2. **Array methods**: Other array methods like `map()`, `reduce()`, or `filter()` can also be used for iteration.

The benchmark result will help determine which approach is the fastest and most suitable for your specific use case.

for loop vs. lodash v4.17.21 range foreach (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `for vs lodash range foreach vs array foreach vs array lodash foreach vs lodash range lodash foreach`

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

for

lodash range foreach

array foreach

array lodash foreach

lodash range lodash foreach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

for loop vs. lodash v4.17.21 range foreach (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: for vs lodash range foreach vs array foreach vs array lodash foreach vs lodash range lodash foreach

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

for

lodash range foreach

array foreach

array lodash foreach

lodash range lodash foreach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `for vs lodash range foreach vs array foreach vs array lodash foreach vs lodash range lodash foreach`