Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
CompareFor20190430
(version: 2)
Comparing performance of:
for vs forEach vs for optimized 1 vs for optimized 2
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var saved = new Array(1000).fill(null).map((v, item) => ({item}));
Tests:
for
var savedMap = {}; for (var i = 0; i < saved.length; i++) { savedMap[saved[i].item] = saved[i]; }
forEach
var savedMap = {}; saved.forEach(item => { savedMap[item.item] = item; });
for optimized 1
var savedMap = {}; for (var i = 0, l = saved.length; i < l; i++) { savedMap[saved[i].item] = saved[i]; }
for optimized 2
var savedMap = {}; for (var i = 0, l = saved.length; i < l; i++) { var item = saved[i]; savedMap[item.item] = item; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
for
forEach
for optimized 1
for optimized 2
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 18_2 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/18.2 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1
Browser/OS:
Mobile Safari 18 on iOS 18.2
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
for
113325.4 Ops/sec
forEach
101821.7 Ops/sec
for optimized 1
110305.8 Ops/sec
for optimized 2
109925.6 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and some pros/cons of each approach. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark compares three different ways to iterate over an array in JavaScript: 1. Traditional `for` loop 2. `forEach` method 3. Optimized `for` loops (with and without a separate variable for the item) **Test Case 1: Traditional `for` Loop** The benchmark definition uses: ```javascript var savedMap = {}; for (var i = 0; i < saved.length; i++) { savedMap[saved[i].item] = saved[i]; } ``` This is a classic `for` loop that iterates over the array using an index variable `i`. The pros of this approach are: * Simple and easy to understand * Works in most browsers However, this approach has some cons: * Slow performance due to the overhead of incrementing the index variable * May not be as efficient as other approaches for large arrays **Test Case 2: `forEach` Method** The benchmark definition uses: ```javascript var savedMap = {}; saved.forEach(item => { savedMap[item.item] = item; }); ``` The `forEach` method is a built-in array method that iterates over the array using a callback function. The pros of this approach are: * Fast performance due to optimized iteration implementation * Does not require manual index management However, this approach has some cons: * May not work in older browsers or environments that do not support `forEach` * Does not provide direct access to the index variable (in this case, it's implicit) **Test Case 3: Optimized `for` Loop** The benchmark definition uses: ```javascript var savedMap = {}; for (var i = 0, l = saved.length; i < l; i++) { // do nothing with i } ``` This is an optimized version of the traditional `for` loop. By removing the unnecessary increment of the index variable, this approach can be faster than the original. The pro of this approach are: * Fast performance due to reduced overhead However, this approach has some cons: * May not work in older browsers or environments that do not support optimized loops * Does not provide direct access to the item being processed (in this case, it's implicit) **Test Case 4: Optimized `for` Loop with Separate Variable** The benchmark definition uses: ```javascript var savedMap = {}; for (var i = 0, l = saved.length; i < l; i++) { var item = saved[i]; savedMap[item.item] = item; } ``` This is another optimized version of the traditional `for` loop. By assigning the current item to a separate variable, this approach can be faster and more efficient. The pros of this approach are: * Fast performance due to reduced overhead * Provides direct access to the item being processed However, this approach has some cons: * May not work in older browsers or environments that do not support optimized loops * Requires manual index management (which may be slower for large arrays) **Library Used: None** There is no library used in these benchmark definitions. The `forEach` method is a built-in array method, and the other approaches use basic JavaScript constructs like `for` loops. **Special JS Feature/Syntax: None** There are no special features or syntax used in these benchmark definitions. **Other Alternatives** Some alternative approaches to iterate over an array in JavaScript include: * Using `while` loops instead of `for` loops * Using recursion to iterate over the array * Using a custom implementation using bitwise operators (e.g., using `shift()` and `unshift()` methods) However, these alternatives may not be as efficient or well-supported as the built-in methods used in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
boom2213243143134daadfadf
Object.fromEntries w/Array.map vs Array.reduce
JS join vs map
Unique values big list
Reduce vs map/join testaaaaa
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?