Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
for of vs for
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
set for of vs arr for vs arr for of
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
set for of
const set = new Set([1, 2, 3, 4, 5]); for (const num of set) { console.log(num); }
arr for
const set = new Set([1, 2, 3, 4, 5]); const arr = [...set[Symbol.iterator]()]; for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) { console.log(arr[i]); }
arr for of
const set = new Set([1, 2, 3, 4, 5]); const arr = [...set[Symbol.iterator]()]; for (const num of arr) { console.log(num); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
set for of
arr for
arr for of
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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks! The provided JSON represents three test cases that compare different approaches to iterating over an array using the `for` loop and `Set`. Here's what each approach entails: 1. **Set for of**: This test case uses a `Set` data structure, which is an unordered collection of unique values. The code creates a set from an array `[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]` and then iterates over it using the `for...of` loop. The loop logs each element to the console. 2. **Array for**: This test case uses an array literal `arr = [...set[Symbol.iterator]()];`. It first creates a set as before, but then uses the spread operator (`...`) and the `[Symbol.iterator()]` method to convert it into an array-like object. The code then iterates over this array using a traditional `for` loop. 3. **Array for of**: This test case is similar to the previous one, except that it uses the `for...of` loop directly on the array-like object created from the set. Now, let's discuss the pros and cons of each approach: * **Set for of**: * Pros: This method has a slight performance advantage due to the optimized iterator implementation in modern browsers. It also avoids creating an additional array, which can be beneficial for memory-constrained scenarios. * Cons: The `for...of` loop may not work as expected if the set contains non-numeric values, and it's less intuitive than using a traditional `for` loop. * **Array for**: * Pros: This method is more straightforward and flexible, allowing you to work with any type of iterable object. It also avoids the potential issues with `Set` iteration. * Cons: Creating an array from the set requires additional memory allocation, which can impact performance in some cases. Additionally, this approach may be slower than using a `for...of` loop directly on the set. * **Array for of**: * Pros: This method combines the benefits of both approaches, allowing you to use the `for...of` loop while still working with an array-like object. * Cons: It may have slightly higher overhead than using a traditional `for` loop on the set. As for other considerations: * **Browser support**: The provided benchmark results are from Chrome 69, but it's essential to note that browser support and iteration behavior can change across different versions and platforms. Ensure that your JavaScript code is compatible with various browsers and devices. * **Memory allocation**: Creating arrays or sets can impact memory allocation, especially in memory-constrained environments. Optimize your code accordingly to minimize memory usage. In terms of special JS features or syntax, none are mentioned explicitly in the provided benchmark. However, it's essential to be aware of additional features like: * `let` and `const` declarations (the benchmark uses these) * Template literals (`\r\n`) * Spread operator (`...`) * Symbol.iterator()` method These features may not be directly related to iteration performance but can impact your code's overall behavior. The other alternatives for testing JavaScript iteration performance include: * **Modern.js**: A popular benchmarking framework for modern web technologies. * **jsperf**: Another well-known benchmarking tool for measuring JavaScript performance. * **Benchmark dot net**: A .NET-based benchmarking library that can be used to measure JavaScript performance on the server-side. Each of these alternatives has its strengths and weaknesses, so it's essential to choose the one that best fits your specific use case.
Related benchmarks:
For in vs For of
foreach vs for vs for in
foreach vs for...of
for of vs forEach with console log
forEach vs for of 7
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?