Benchmark: for of 1000 A - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

Var
let H = ""; const data = [...Array(1000).keys()]; for (let V of data) { H += V; }
n
let H = ""; for (let V of [...Array(1000).keys()]) { H += V; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Var
n

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

Test name	Executions per second
Var	14129.3 Ops/sec
n	14137.7 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks and analyze the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided benchmark definition is a JSON object that defines two tests:

1. `for of 1000 A`: This test uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over an array of numbers from 0 to 999, concatenating each number to a string variable `H`.
2. `n`: This test uses the new `for...of` loop syntax, which is shorthand for iterating over an iterable (in this case, an array) without manually incrementing a counter.

**Options Compared**

The two tests compare the performance of traditional `for` loops with the new `for...of` loop syntax. The `for...of` loop syntax has become a popular choice in modern JavaScript development due to its concise and expressive nature.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Traditional `for` Loop**:
	* Pros:
		+ Wide browser support
		+ Easy to read and understand for developers familiar with the traditional syntax
		+ No dependency on newer browsers or features
	* Cons:
		+ More verbose code compared to `for...of`
		+ Requires manual incrementation of a counter variable
2. **`for...of` Loop**:
	* Pros:
		+ Concise and expressive syntax
		+ Reduces verbosity and improves readability
		+ Eliminates the need for manual incrementation of a counter variable
	* Cons:
		+ Requires support for newer browsers and features (specifically, ECMAScript 2015 or later)
		+ May have different performance characteristics compared to traditional `for` loops

**Library Usage**

None of the tests provided use any external libraries.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The `for...of` loop syntax introduced in ECMAScript 2015 is a notable feature that allows for concise and expressive iteration over iterables. This syntax is supported by most modern browsers, but not older ones.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to benchmark other iteration constructs or JavaScript features, here are some alternatives:

* `while` loop
* `for` loop with an incrementing counter variable
* Other ES6+ features like `let` and `const` variables, arrow functions, or generators

For testing newer JavaScript features, you can also consider using tools like:

* Jest (a popular testing framework)
* Mocha (another testing framework)
* Babel (a transpiler that supports various JavaScript versions)

Keep in mind that the choice of benchmarking tool and approach depends on your specific use case, target audience, and performance requirements.

Related benchmarks:

for of 1000 A (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Var vs n

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Var

n

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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