Benchmark: for vs for..of vs NodeList.forEach vs Array.forEach vs jQuery.each

HTML Preparation code:

<content id="demo">Hello World!</content>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

let content = '';
for (let i=0; i<10000; i+=1) {
    content += '<div class="component" data-component="component' + i + '">Content ' + i + '</div>';
}
document.getElementById("demo").innerHTML = content;

Tests:

for
let components = []; let values = []; const queryComponentsFor = document.querySelectorAll('[data-component]'); for (let i = 0; i < queryComponentsFor.length; ++i) { values.push(queryComponentsFor[i].getAttribute('data-component')); components.push(queryComponentsFor[i]); }
for..of
let components = []; let values = []; for (let el of document.querySelectorAll('[data-component]')) { values.push(el.getAttribute('data-component')); components.push(el); }
NodeList.forEach
let components = []; let values = []; document.querySelectorAll('[data-component]').forEach(el => { values.push(el.getAttribute('data-component')); components.push(el); });
Array.forEach
let components = []; let values = []; [...document.querySelectorAll('[data-component]')].forEach(el => { values.push(el.getAttribute('data-component')); components.push(el); });
jQuery.each
let components = []; let values = []; $('[data-component]').each((i, el) => { values.push(el.getAttribute('data-component')); components.push(el); });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
for..of
NodeList.forEach
Array.forEach
jQuery.each

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/17.6.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 17 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for	1346.9 Ops/sec
for..of	1505.4 Ops/sec
NodeList.forEach	1414.0 Ops/sec
Array.forEach	998.1 Ops/sec
jQuery.each	2219.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks, comparing different approaches for various tasks. In this case, we're analyzing a benchmark that tests four different methods for iterating over an array of HTML elements: `for`, `for..of`, `NodeList.forEach`, `Array.forEach`, and `jQuery.each`.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is testing the performance of each iteration method on an array of 10,000 HTML elements. The test case creates an array of elements using `document.querySelectorAll('[data-component]')` and then iterates over it using one of the four methods.

**Options compared**

Here's a brief overview of each option being tested:

1. **For loop**: A traditional for loop that uses a counter variable to iterate over the array.
2. **For..of loop**: A newer for loop syntax that allows iterating directly over an iterable (in this case, an array).
3. **NodeList.forEach**: A method on `NodeList` objects that iterates over the elements in the list.
4. **Array.forEach**: A method on arrays that iterates over the elements in the array.
5. **jQuery.each**: A method in jQuery that iterates over a collection of elements.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each option:

1. **For loop**:
	* Pros: Simple, easy to understand, and widely supported.
	* Cons: Can be slow for large arrays due to the overhead of the loop variable.
2. **For..of loop**:
	* Pros: More expressive and concise than traditional for loops, with fewer errors.
	* Cons: Less widely supported in older browsers, and may require more setup.
3. **NodeList.forEach**:
	* Pros: Optimized for performance and memory usage, with good support across browsers.
	* Cons: May not be suitable for arrays, as it's designed specifically for lists.
4. **Array.forEach**:
	* Pros: Simple and easy to use, with good support across browsers.
	* Cons: May have slower performance compared to other options due to the overhead of the method call.
5. **jQuery.each**:
	* Pros: Convenient and easy to use, especially in jQuery-heavy codebases.
	* Cons: May add unnecessary overhead due to the presence of jQuery.

**Other considerations**

When choosing an iteration method, consider factors like:

* Performance requirements
* Code readability and maintainability
* Browser support and compatibility

In this benchmark, `NodeList.forEach` appears to be the fastest option, followed closely by the for loop. However, the results may vary depending on specific use cases and requirements.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives or want to explore other iteration methods, consider:

1. **Arrow functions**: A concise way to create small, one-time-use functions.
2. **Map(), Filter(), Reduce()**: Methods on arrays that perform transformations, filtering, and aggregation operations.
3. **Generators**: A way to create iterators that can be used in loops or with `for...of`.
4. **Async iteration**: Using `async/await` and `for await` loops for asynchronous iteration.

Keep in mind that each option has its trade-offs, and the best choice depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

for vs for..of vs NodeList.forEach vs Array.forEach vs jQuery.each (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for vs for..of vs NodeList.forEach vs Array.forEach vs jQuery.each

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

for

for..of

NodeList.forEach

Array.forEach

jQuery.each

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):