Benchmark: Tab length - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/angularjs/1.4.2/angular.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var tab = [];
tab[999]= null;
var i = 0;
var sum = 0;

Tests:

test 1
for(i=0; i<tab.length;i++){sum += 1;}
test 2
var a = tab.length; for(i=0; i<a;i++){sum += 1;}
test 3
_.forEach(tab, function(){sum += 1;});
test 4
angular.forEach(tab, function() {sum += 1;});
test 5
tab.every(function (x) {sum += 1});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test 1
test 2
test 3
test 4
test 5

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/7.0; rv:11.0) like Gecko

Browser/OS: IE 11 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
test 1	44420.3 Ops/sec
test 2	85048.3 Ops/sec
test 3	10682.1 Ops/sec
test 4	5326.9 Ops/sec
test 5	6764.9 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the details of this benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

This benchmark is measuring the performance of different ways to iterate over an array (or tab) in JavaScript, specifically when accessing its length property and executing code within a loop. The goal is to compare the execution speed of various methods for iterating over arrays.

**The Test Cases:**

There are five test cases, each representing a different approach to iterating over the array:

1. **Test 1**: `for(i=0; i<tab.length;i++){sum += 1;}`
	* Pros: Simple and straightforward.
	* Cons: Inefficient because it accesses `tab.length` on every iteration.
2. **Test 2**: `var a = tab.length; for(i=0; i<a;i++){sum += 1;}\r\n`
	* Pros: Faster than Test 1 by caching the length value in a variable.
	* Cons: Still needs to access the array's length on every iteration, albeit once before the loop.
3. **Test 3**: `_.forEach(tab, function(){sum += 1;});` (using Lodash library)
	* Pros: Utilizes a more efficient, native-like iteration method.
	* Cons: Requires the Lodash library, which may add overhead.
4. **Test 4**: `angular.forEach(tab, function() {sum += 1;});` (using AngularJS library)
	* Pros: Another efficient iteration method, similar to Test 3.
	* Cons: Requires the AngularJS library, which may add overhead.
5. **Test 5**: `tab.every(function (x) {sum += 1});`
	* Pros: Uses a more functional programming approach, which can be efficient for certain use cases.
	* Cons: May not be suitable for every scenario, as it modifies the sum variable outside of a loop.

**Other Considerations:**

When evaluating these test results, keep in mind:

* The performance differences may vary depending on the specific browser and JavaScript engine being used.
* The presence of external libraries (Lodash or AngularJS) can affect the benchmark's accuracy.
* Other factors like array size, data complexity, and caching strategies might influence the performance outcomes.

**Other Alternatives:**

Some additional iteration methods to consider:

1. **Array.prototype.map()**: While not directly related to this benchmark, it's another efficient way to iterate over arrays in modern JavaScript.
2. **Set.forEach()**: If working with sets instead of arrays, Set.forEach() might be a more suitable choice.
3. **Native Array iteration methods (ES6+)**: Newer JavaScript versions provide built-in array iteration methods like `for...of` and `Array.prototype.entries()`.

When evaluating benchmark results, it's essential to understand the specific use case being tested and consider all relevant factors that might influence performance.

Related benchmarks:

Tab length (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: test 1 vs test 2 vs test 3 vs test 4 vs test 5

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

test 1

test 2

test 3

test 4

test 5

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated 6 months ago):