Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
js 1 foreach
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
javascript 1 vs js2
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var arr = [{key:0,value:'majo'},{key:1,value:'aaaads'},{key:2,value:'cdsdfs'}];
Tests:
javascript 1
arr.prototype.forEach(itm=>{})
js2
arr.forEach(itm=>{})
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
javascript 1
js2
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and some pros/cons of different approaches. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is a script that will be executed on a given JavaScript engine or interpreter. The two benchmark definitions are: 1. `arr.prototype.forEach(itm=>{})`: This is an attempt to create an instance method on the `Array` prototype using an arrow function. 2. `arr.forEach(itm=>{})`: This is another attempt, but without creating an instance method. **Library** The `lodash.js` library is included in the benchmark preparation code as a script source. Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a lot of useful functions, such as array manipulation and iteration utilities. In this case, it's likely being used to provide a way to iterate over the `arr` array. **Special JS Features/Syntax** There isn't any special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in these benchmark definitions. However, it's worth noting that arrow functions (`=>`) were introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and have since become a standard part of modern JavaScript. **Options Compared** The two benchmark definitions are compared to see which one is faster: 1. `arr.prototype.forEach(itm=>{})`: This creates an instance method on the `Array` prototype using an arrow function. 2. `arr.forEach(itm=>{})`: This attempts to create a standalone array method without creating an instance method. **Pros/Cons of Different Approaches** 1. **Creating an instance method**: Creating an instance method on the `Array` prototype can be faster because it avoids the overhead of creating a new function object. * Pros: Can be faster, avoids function object creation overhead * Cons: May not work in all browsers or environments that don't support array methods 2. **Standalone array method**: Creating a standalone array method without creating an instance method is a more traditional approach. * Pros: Works in most browsers and environments, doesn't rely on prototype manipulation * Cons: May be slower due to function object creation overhead **Other Considerations** 1. Browser differences: The benchmark results show that Chrome 67 runs significantly faster than the other browser (Chrome 67 without a specific test case name), suggesting that there might be some browser-specific issues with the standalone array method approach. 2. Testing for specific browsers and platforms is essential to ensure that benchmarks are accurate across different environments. **Alternatives** Other alternatives could include: 1. Using `Function.prototype.bind()` or other methods to create an instance method, which would avoid prototype manipulation and rely on function object creation overhead instead. 2. Using a library like Lodash's `assignIn()` function to create an instance method, which might provide a more accurate benchmarking result. 3. Creating a test suite with multiple test cases to cover different scenarios and edge cases. Keep in mind that the specifics of these alternatives would depend on the desired testing goals and requirements.
Related benchmarks:
lodash eachfor
circleTest
lodash vs es6 in forEach method
lodash-method
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?