Benchmark: Loop Testing - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

// Create an array of 1000 random intergers between 1 and 10000
var arrRandom = [];
for(var intCtr=0; intCtr<1000; intCtr++) {
  arrRandom.push(Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(10000)));
}

function doRedeuce(pArray) {
	return pArray.reduce(function(accum, curr) { return accum += curr; });
}
function doRedeuceArrowFunc(pArray) {
	return pArray.reduce((accum, curr) => accum += curr);
}
function doLoop(pArray) {
	var accum = 0;
    const l = pArray.length
	for(var intCtr=0; intCtr<l; intCtr++) {
		accum += pArray[intCtr];
	}
	return accum;
}
function doForEach(pArray) {
	var accum = 0;
	pArray.forEach((item) => {
		accum += item;
	});
}

Tests:

Reduce arrow
var reduceResult=0; redeuceResult = doRedeuceArrowFunc(arrRandom);
ForLoop
var loopResult=0; loopResult = doLoop(arrRandom);
ForEach
var forEachResult=0 forEachResult = doForEach(arrRandom)
Reduce
var reduceResult=0; redeuceResult = doRedeuce(arrRandom);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Reduce arrow
ForLoop
ForEach
Reduce

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark test cases and explanations.

**Benchmark Test Cases**

The provided benchmark test cases measure the performance of three different approaches to reduce an array of integers: `doRedeuce`, `doRedeuceArrowFunc`, `doLoop`, and `doForEach`.

1. **doRedeuce**: This function uses a traditional loop with a variable (`intCtr`) to iterate over the array and accumulate the sum.
2. **doRedeuceArrowFunc**: This function uses an arrow function (a shorthand way of defining a function) to perform the reduction operation in a single line.
3. **doLoop**: This function uses a traditional for loop with a variable (`intCtr`) to iterate over the array and accumulate the sum.
4. **doForEach**: This function uses the `forEach` method, which calls a provided callback function once for each element in the array, to perform the reduction operation.

**Comparison of Options**

Here's a comparison of the four options:

* **Performance**: The `doRedeuceArrowFunc` approach tends to be the fastest, followed by `doLoop`, then `doForEach`, and finally `doRedeuce`.
	+ Pros: Arrow functions are concise and often faster than traditional loops.
	+ Cons: They can be less readable for complex operations or those that involve multiple variables.
* **Readability**: The `doLoop` approach is the most readable, as it uses a traditional loop with clear variable names.
	+ Pros: Easy to understand and maintain, especially for complex operations.
	+ Cons: Can be slower than other approaches due to the overhead of the loop.
* **Code Reusability**: The `doForEach` approach is the least reusable, as it relies on the specific implementation of the `forEach` method, which may vary across browsers or versions.
	+ Pros: None notable
	+ Cons: Limited flexibility and maintainability.

**Libraries and Special Features**

The test cases use no external libraries. However, they do utilize some special JavaScript features:

* **Arrow functions**: Used in `doRedeuceArrowFunc` to define a concise reduction operation.
* **for...of loops**: Not explicitly used in this benchmark, but implied by the `forEach` method usage.

**Other Considerations**

* **Browser and Platform Variability**: The benchmark results are specific to Chrome 69 on Windows Desktop. Results may vary across other browsers, platforms, or versions.
* **Array Size and Distribution**: The benchmark uses an array of 1000 random integers between 1 and 10,000. This can affect the performance results.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for reducing arrays in JavaScript include:

* Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` with a traditional callback function: `arrRandom.reduce(function(accum, curr) { return accum + curr; }, 0)`
* Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Ramda for array manipulation and reduction
* Leveraging modern JavaScript features like `Promise.all()` or `Map` reductions

Keep in mind that the performance results may vary depending on the specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

Loop Testing (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Reduce arrow vs ForLoop vs ForEach vs Reduce

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Reduce arrow

ForLoop

ForEach

Reduce

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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