Benchmark: totalQuantitiesCount

Script Preparation code:

function generateTestData(size) {
  const carts = {};
  for (let i = 0; i < size; i++) {
    const cartType = `cart_${i}`;
    carts[cartType] = Math.random() > 0.1 ? { totalQuantityCount: Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) } : null;
  }
  return carts;
}

var state = {
  carts: {
    carts: generateTestData(1000000)
  }
};

var totalQuantitiesCount = 0;

Tests:

reduce
Object.values(state.carts.carts).reduce((totalQuantitiesCount, cart) => totalQuantitiesCount + (cart?.totalQuantityCount ?? 0), 0);
forEach if
Object.values(state.carts.carts).forEach((cart) => { if (cart !== null) totalQuantitiesCount += cart.totalQuantityCount; });
for of
for (const cart of Object.values(state.carts.carts)) { totalQuantitiesCount += cart?.totalQuantityCount ?? 0; }
for of if
for (const cart of Object.values(state.carts.carts)) { if (cart !== null) totalQuantitiesCount += cart.totalQuantityCount; }
for
const carts = Object.values(state.carts.carts); for (let i = 0; i < carts.length; i++) { const cart = carts[i]; if (cart !== null) { totalQuantitiesCount += cart.totalQuantityCount; } }
forEach
Object.values(state.carts.carts).forEach((cart) => totalQuantitiesCount += (cart?.totalQuantityCount ?? 0));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
reduce
forEach if
for of
for of if
for
forEach

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/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 127 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

reduce

2/s

forEach

2/s

forEach if

2/s

for

2/s

for of if

2/s

for of

2/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ reduce	2 Ops/sec
forEach	2 Ops/sec
forEach if	2 Ops/sec
for	2 Ops/sec
for of if	2 Ops/sec
for of	2 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided benchmark tests the execution time and performance of different methods to count the total quantities in an array of objects.

**What is being tested:**

* The benchmark compares six different approaches to iterate over an array of objects and calculate the sum of a specific property (totalQuantityCount).
* Each approach uses the `Object.values()` method to get an array of object values, which are then iterated over using either a `for` loop, a `forEach` loop, or a functional programming approach with `reduce()`.

**Options compared:**

1. **For loop**: A traditional loop that iterates over the array using a counter variable.
	* Pros: Simple and straightforward, easy to understand.
	* Cons: Can be slower due to the overhead of the loop control logic.
2. **ForEach loop**: A loop that iterates over the array using an arrow function or a callback function.
	* Pros: Similar to the traditional for loop but with a more concise syntax.
	* Cons: May have performance implications due to the use of a separate function.
3. **Reduce()**: A functional programming approach that applies a reduction function to each element in the array.
	* Pros: Can be faster than traditional loops or foreach loops, especially for large datasets.
	* Cons: May require more memory and CPU cycles due to the overhead of the reduction function.
4. **For...of loop**: A loop that iterates over the array using a new type of loop that is specifically designed for iterating over arrays and objects.
	* Pros: Similar to traditional loops but with a more concise syntax and potentially better performance.
	* Cons: May have limited support in older browsers or environments.
5. **For loop with conditional statement**: A variation of the traditional loop where an if statement is used to skip certain elements.
	* Pros: Similar to traditional for loops but with added flexibility.
	* Cons: May introduce additional overhead due to the use of a conditional statement.

**Other considerations:**

* The benchmark uses a large dataset (1,000,000 objects) to simulate real-world performance scenarios.
* The results are displayed in terms of executions per second, which provides a rough estimate of the performance difference between each approach.
* The benchmark is run on Chrome 127, a relatively modern browser with good performance characteristics.

**Library and special JS features:**

None of the approaches rely on any specific libraries or special JavaScript features. However, it's worth noting that the use of `Object.values()` and the newer `for...of` loop syntax may be considered non-standard in older browsers or environments.

**Alternatives:**

* Other iterative methods could be used, such as using a `while` loop or an `Array.prototype.forEach()` with a callback function.
* Alternative approaches might include using a parallel processing library or distributing the computation across multiple CPU cores.
* Depending on the specific use case and requirements, other optimization techniques might be applicable, such as caching, memoization, or using a more efficient data structure.

totalQuantitiesCount (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `reduce vs forEach if vs for of vs for of if vs for vs forEach`

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

reduce

forEach if

for of

for of if

for

forEach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

totalQuantitiesCount (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: reduce vs forEach if vs for of vs for of if vs for vs forEach

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

reduce

forEach if

for of

for of if

for

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: `reduce vs forEach if vs for of vs for of if vs for vs forEach`