Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
for loop length vs length+1 vs less-equal
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
Comparing performance of:
end vs end+1 vs less equal
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
end
const dump=[]; const end=100000; for(var i=0; i<end; i++){ dump.push(i); }
end+1
const dump=[]; const end=99999; for(var i=0; i<end+1; i++){ dump.push(i); }
less equal
const dump=[]; const end=99999; for(var i=0; i<=end; i++){ dump.push(i); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
end
end+1
less equal
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 years ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/120.0.0.0
Browser/OS:
Chrome 120 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=492526" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
less equal
1K/s
end+1
1K/s
end
1K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
less equal
1,466 Ops/sec
end+1
1,444 Ops/sec
end
1,442 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and considered. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark tests the performance of three different for loop approaches: `for (var i = 0; i < end; i++)`, `for (var i = 0; i < end+1; i++)`, and `for (var i = 0; i <= end; i++)`. The loop is designed to push a value (`i`) onto an array (`dump`) a specified number of times, where the number of iterations is controlled by the `end` variable. **Options Compared** The three options being compared are: 1. **`for (var i = 0; i < end; i++)`**: This is the most straightforward approach, using a counter variable (`i`) that increments until it reaches `end`. This loop is likely to be the fastest because it doesn't require any additional comparisons or condition checks. 2. **`for (var i = 0; i < end+1; i++)`**: This loop adds an extra iteration by incrementing `i` one more time than necessary, using `end+1` as the condition. This approach is likely to be slower because it introduces an unnecessary comparison and increment. 3. **`for (var i = 0; i <= end; i++)`**: This loop uses a conditional operator (`<=`) instead of `<`, allowing `i` to reach `end` even if `end` is not exactly the number of iterations desired. This approach may be slower than the first option because it requires an additional comparison. **Pros and Cons** * **Optimized Loop (1)**: Pros: + Simple and efficient + No unnecessary comparisons or increments Cons: None notable. * **Slower Loop (2)**: Pros: None notable. Cons: + Introduces unnecessary comparison and increment, which can slow it down. + May not be suitable for loops where precision is crucial. * **Less Equal Loop (3)**: Pros: + Allows `i` to reach `end` even if `end` is not exactly the number of iterations desired Cons: + Introduces an additional comparison, which can slow it down. + May not be suitable for loops where precision is crucial. **Library and Special Features** None are mentioned in the provided benchmark definition or test cases. The code uses only standard JavaScript features and syntax. **Other Alternatives** Some alternative approaches to consider when working with loops include: * **Array.prototype.forEach()**: Instead of using a traditional `for` loop, you can use `forEach()` to iterate over an array. * **Generators**: Generators provide a way to create iterators that can be paused and resumed, which can be useful in certain scenarios. * **Reduce() and Array.prototype.every()**: These methods provide ways to perform operations on arrays with fewer loops. When working with loops, consider the following best practices: * Use `for` loops when simplicity and efficiency are important. * Avoid unnecessary comparisons or increments that can slow down your code. * Consider using alternative approaches like `forEach()` or generators in certain scenarios.
Related benchmarks
Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster?
Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster2?
Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster? check for null
Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster (string vs int)?
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?