Benchmark: assphinxtersayswhasff

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 12345; i++) {
  arr[i] = i;
}

function someFn(i) {
  return (i * 3 * 8 / 1200 * 0.002 / 40 * 0.2);
}

var sum = 0;

Tests:

forEach
arr.forEach(item => sum += someFn(item));
reduce
sumReduce = arr.reduce((lastValue, item) => { return sum += someFn(item); });
map
arr.map(item => (sum += someFn(item)));
filter
arr.filter(item => (sum += someFn(item)));
for
for (var j = 0; j < arr.length; j++) { sum += someFn(arr[j]); }
forOf
for (const num of arr) { sum += someFn(num); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
forEach
reduce
map
filter
for
forOf

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

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

forOf

412/s

reduce

394/s

filter

384/s

forEach

381/s

map

341/s

for

212/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ forOf	412 Ops/sec
reduce	394 Ops/sec
filter	384 Ops/sec
forEach	381 Ops/sec
map	341 Ops/sec
for	212 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that tests various looping constructs in JavaScript:

* `forEach`
* `reduce`
* `map`
* `filter`
* `for` (traditional loop)
* `forOf` (iteration with `of` keyword)

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates an array `arr` with 12345 elements, each initialized with its index `i`. It also defines a function `someFn(i)` that performs some arithmetic calculation on the input `i`.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided.

**Looping Constructs Comparison**

Let's examine the looping constructs being compared:

1. **`forEach`**: Iterates over the array using the `forEach` method, executing the callback function for each element.
	* Pros: Efficient and concise way to iterate over arrays, built-in support in most browsers.
	* Cons: May not be suitable for use cases where iteration is controlled or optimized.
2. **`reduce`**: Iterates over the array using the `reduce` method, accumulating a result by applying a callback function to each element.
	* Pros: Can be useful when building complex data structures or aggregating values.
	* Cons: May not be suitable for simple iteration tasks due to its cumulative nature.
3. **`map`**: Iterates over the array using the `map` method, creating a new array with transformed elements.
	* Pros: Suitable for transforming arrays without changing their original structure.
	* Cons: Can be memory-intensive if dealing with large datasets.
4. **`filter`**: Iterates over the array using the `filter` method, creating a new array with filtered elements.
	* Pros: Useful when removing unwanted elements from an array.
	* Cons: Similar to `map`, can be memory-intensive for large datasets.
5. **`for` (traditional loop)**: Loops through the array using a traditional `for` loop, accessing each element directly.
	* Pros: Low-level control over iteration and indexing.
	* Cons: Can be verbose and error-prone due to manual indexing and looping logic.
6. **`forOf`**: Iterates over the array using the `for...of` loop, which provides automatic indexing and iteration.
	* Pros: Easy-to-use syntax and automatic indexing make it more concise than traditional loops.
	* Cons: May have performance overhead or limitations compared to other methods.

**Library Usage**

The benchmark uses the built-in JavaScript methods (`forEach`, `map`, `filter`, `reduce`) without any additional libraries. However, it's worth noting that modern browsers support these methods, but older browsers might require polyfills or alternative implementations.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There is no special JS feature or syntax used in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing the performance of various looping constructs.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches to iterate over arrays could include:

* Using a `while` loop and manual indexing.
* Utilizing `Array.prototype.every`, `Array.prototype.some`, or other array methods that provide more control over iteration.
* Implementing custom iteration logic using callbacks, promises, or async/await.

Keep in mind that the choice of looping construct depends on specific use cases, performance requirements, and personal preference.

assphinxtersayswhasff (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `forEach vs reduce vs map vs filter vs for vs forOf`

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

forEach

reduce

map

filter

for

forOf

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

assphinxtersayswhasff (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: forEach vs reduce vs map vs filter vs for vs forOf

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

forEach

reduce

map

filter

for

forOf

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: `forEach vs reduce vs map vs filter vs for vs forOf`