Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
function call test
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
forEach loop with function call vs forEach loop without function call
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
forEach loop with function call
const arr = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]; arr.forEach(num => {call(num);}); function call(num){ return num + num }
forEach loop without function call
const arr = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]; arr.forEach(num => {return num + num;});
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
forEach loop with function call
forEach loop without function call
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):
Let's break down the benchmark and its options. **Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark measures the performance of JavaScript loops that call functions within an array using the `forEach` method. The test cases are designed to evaluate how adding function calls inside the loop affects execution speed. **Options Compared** Two primary options are compared: 1. **Adding a function call**: In this scenario, a separate function named `call(num)` is defined and called for each element in the array. This introduces additional overhead due to function creation, lookup, and execution. 2. **Returning without calling a function**: Instead of creating a new function, the loop returns the result of adding two numbers directly. **Pros and Cons** * **Adding a function call**: + Pros: Can be useful in scenarios where a reusable function is needed. + Cons: Introduces unnecessary overhead due to function creation and execution, potentially slowing down the loop. * **Returning without calling a function**: + Pros: Reduces overhead by avoiding function creation and execution. + Cons: May not be suitable for all use cases where a separate function is necessary. **Library Usage** There doesn't appear to be any notable library usage in this benchmark. However, if the benchmark were to test other libraries or frameworks, it's essential to note that specific libraries can introduce additional overhead due to their functionality and implementation details. **Special JS Features/Syntax** This benchmark does not explicitly use special JavaScript features or syntax like `async/await`, `generators`, or `let`/`const` functions with complex logic. If such features were used, it would be essential to consider how they might impact performance in the context of this benchmark. **Alternative Approaches** To optimize JavaScript loops for better performance: 1. **Avoid unnecessary function calls**: Reduce overhead by minimizing the number of function calls and executions within loops. 2. **Use native JavaScript optimizations**: Leverage browser-specific optimizations, such as SIMD (Single Instruction, Multiple Data) instructions, which can be applied to certain types of calculations. 3. **Minimize array traversals**: Optimize data access patterns to reduce unnecessary iterations or lookups within arrays. 4. **Profile and analyze performance**: Use tools like Chrome DevTools or Node.js built-in profiling to identify performance bottlenecks in your code. Keep in mind that the specific optimization strategies will depend on the use case, hardware, and browser/JavaScript environment.
Related benchmarks:
Empty function
bind-2018-test
func,call vs direct call + global
Bad await use
return undefined nested function
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?