Benchmark: for.. of vs forEach

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]

Tests:

forEach
arr.forEach((value) => { console.log(value); });
for.. of
for (const value of arr) { console.log(value); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
forEach
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the JavaScript microbenchmarking test case provided by MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition and Script Preparation Code**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches for iterating over an array: `for.. of` and `forEach`. The script preparation code creates an array `arr` with 11 elements, which will be used as input for both iteration methods.

**Options being compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **for.. of**: This is a new iteration method introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It allows you to iterate over arrays and other iterable objects using the `of` keyword.
2. **forEach**: This is an older iteration method that has been part of JavaScript since its early days. It takes a callback function as an argument, which is executed for each element in the array.

**Pros and Cons**

**for.. of**:

Pros:

* More concise and readable code
* Reduces the need for explicit indexing or array length checks

Cons:

* May be less efficient than `forEach` due to additional overhead for type checking and iteration planning
* Not supported by older browsers or JavaScript engines

**forEach**:

Pros:

* Wide support across various browsers and JavaScript engines
* Can handle errors and exceptions more easily

Cons:

* More verbose code compared to `for.. of`
* Requires explicit indexing or array length checks

**Other considerations**

Both `for.. of` and `forEach` have their strengths and weaknesses. In general, `for.. of` is a better choice when:

* Readability and conciseness are important
* You're working with modern JavaScript engines and browsers that support it

On the other hand, `forEach` might be a better choice when:

* You need to handle errors or exceptions more easily
* You're working with older browsers or JavaScript engines that don't support `for.. of`

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library usage in this benchmark.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the two iteration methods being compared. However, it's worth noting that `for.. of` relies on the ES6 iteration protocol, which might introduce some complexity for developers familiar with older iteration methods.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative iteration methods or comparing performance between different approaches, MeasureThat.net offers a wide range of benchmarks and tools. Some examples include:

* **Array methods**: `map()`, `filter()`, `reduce()`
* **Regular expressions**: `String.prototype.match()`, `String.prototype.replace()`
* **Math operations**: Basic arithmetic operations like addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division

Feel free to explore these alternatives or create your own benchmarks using MeasureThat.net's tools!

Related benchmarks:

for.. of vs forEach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: forEach vs for.. of

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

forEach

for.. of

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):