Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
jQuery.each() vs Array.prototype.forEach()
(version: 4)
Comparing performance of:
jQuery.each vs Array.prototype.forEach vs traditional for loop
Created:
9 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = ['torus', 'gospel', 'bacon', 'moist', 'lodge', 'flip', 'ev', 'usual', 'glans', 'lanka', 'ames', 'stoic', 'weco', 'buff', 'naacp', 'mercy', 'stork', 'rq', 'mace', '37', 'rung', 'shod', 'snap', 'pr', 'horus', 'lane', 'safe', 'tie', 'yeasty', 'topple', 'grist', 'coed', 'sled', 'bosom', 'packet', 'xn', 'bunch', 'rowdy', 'jo', 'prone', 'styli', 'warmth', 'jimmy', 'launch', 'aspire', 'roil', 'ohm', 'doff', 'slice', 'dream', 'roger', 'theme', 'lz', 'minus', 'lusty', '35th', 'acuity', 'eli', 'spool', 'pivot'];
Tests:
jQuery.each
var temp; $.each(arr, function(index, item) { temp = item; });
Array.prototype.forEach
var temp; arr.forEach(function(item) { temp = item; });
traditional for loop
var temp; for (var i = 0, len = arr.length; i !== len; ++i) { temp = arr[i]; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
jQuery.each
Array.prototype.forEach
traditional for loop
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/17.4.1 Safari/605.1.15
Browser/OS:
Safari 17 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
jQuery.each
0.0 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.forEach
10529261.0 Ops/sec
traditional for loop
824169.6 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks! The provided JSON represents a benchmark test that compares the performance of three approaches for iterating over an array: 1. `Array.prototype.forEach()` 2. A traditional `for` loop 3. jQuery's `$.each()` method (specifically, `.each(arr, function(index, item) { ... })`) Now, let's break down each option and their pros and cons: **1. Array.prototype.forEach()** `forEach()` is a modern JavaScript method that was introduced in ECMAScript 5 (ES5). It provides a convenient way to iterate over arrays without the need for explicit indexing or loops. Pros: * Efficient: `forEach()` uses optimized internal implementations, making it faster than traditional loops. * Concise: `forEach()` eliminates the need for separate loop variables and conditional checks. * Modern syntax: Using `forEach()` is a good practice for modern JavaScript development. Cons: * Compatibility: Although widely supported, some older browsers might not support `forEach()`. However, in this benchmark, all tests are run on Safari 17, which should cover most use cases. **2. Traditional for loop** A traditional `for` loop uses an explicit index variable to access array elements. This approach requires more boilerplate code but provides fine-grained control over the iteration process. Pros: * Control: With a `for` loop, you have direct access to each element and can optimize specific parts of your code. * Portability: Traditional loops are supported across all browsers, making them suitable for legacy projects or cross-browser development. Cons: * Boilerplate: Writing traditional loops requires more code than using methods like `forEach()`. * Efficiency: Optimized internal implementations might outperform simple loops in many cases. **3. jQuery's .each() method** `$.each()` is a convenience wrapper around the `forEach()` method, specifically designed for use with jQuery's event handling and DOM manipulation contexts. Pros: * Familiarity: Developers already familiar with jQuery will feel comfortable using `.each()`. * Compatibility: As part of jQuery, `.each()` is widely supported across modern browsers. Cons: * Overhead: Using `.each()` introduces a layer of indirection, which might incur additional performance overhead. * jQuery-specific: If you're not working within the jQuery ecosystem, using `.each()` might be less efficient than native methods like `forEach()`. In this benchmark, we see that `Array.prototype.forEach()` is the fastest approach, followed closely by traditional loops. However, jQuery's `.each()` method performs poorly, likely due to its overhead and compatibility with older browsers. Other alternatives for iterating over arrays in JavaScript include: * `for...in`: This syntax allows iteration over object properties but can be slower than array methods. * `Array.prototype.map()`, `Array.prototype.filter()`, or other utility methods: These can be used for more complex data transformations, but might incur additional overhead due to the creation of new arrays. When developing JavaScript applications, understanding the trade-offs between these iteration methods and choosing the best approach for your specific use case will help you optimize performance and write efficient code.
Related benchmarks:
jQuery.each() vs Array.prototype.forEach() vs _.each()
test jsss
spread vs concat vs unshift Big string array
jQuery $.each() vs Array.prototype.forEach()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?