Benchmark: String looping test

Script Preparation code:

function randomDigits() {
	return Math.floor(Math.random() * (2**64)).toString();
}

String.prototype.reduce = Array.prototype.reduce

Tests:

for loop
let digits = randomDigits(); let sum = 0; for (let i = 0; i < digits.length; ++i) { sum += +digits[i]; }
Array.prototype.reduce.call
let digits = randomDigits(); let sum = 0; sum = Array.prototype.reduce.call(digits, (prev, curr) => prev + +curr, 0);
String.prototype.reduce
let digits = randomDigits(); let sum = 0; sum = digits.reduce((prev, curr) => prev + +curr, 0);
Array.prototype.forEach
let digits = randomDigits(); let sum = 0; Array.prototype.forEach.apply(digits, [(i) => sum += +i]);
.split.reduce
let digits = randomDigits(); let sum = 0; sum = digits.split('').reduce((prev, curr) => prev + +curr, 0);
.split.forEach
let digits = randomDigits(); let sum = 0; digits.split('').forEach((i) => sum += +i);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for loop
Array.prototype.reduce.call
String.prototype.reduce
Array.prototype.forEach
.split.reduce
.split.forEach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/146.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 146 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

for loop

12.9M/s

.split.reduce

9.5M/s

.split.forEach

8.4M/s

String.prototype.reduce

1.7M/s

Array.prototype.forEach

1.7M/s

Array.prototype.reduce.call

1.6M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ for loop	12,871,441 Ops/sec
.split.reduce	9,470,044 Ops/sec
.split.forEach	8,388,160 Ops/sec
String.prototype.reduce	1,700,552 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.forEach	1,660,419 Ops/sec
Array.prototype.reduce.call	1,632,480 Ops/sec

String looping test (version: 4)

Comparing performance of: `for loop vs Array.prototype.reduce.call vs String.prototype.reduce vs Array.prototype.forEach vs .split.reduce vs .split.forEach`

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

for loop

Array.prototype.reduce.call

String.prototype.reduce

Array.prototype.forEach

.split.reduce

.split.forEach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

String looping test (version: 4)

Comparing performance of: for loop vs Array.prototype.reduce.call vs String.prototype.reduce vs Array.prototype.forEach vs .split.reduce vs .split.forEach

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

for loop

Array.prototype.reduce.call

String.prototype.reduce

Array.prototype.forEach

.split.reduce

.split.forEach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `for loop vs Array.prototype.reduce.call vs String.prototype.reduce vs Array.prototype.forEach vs .split.reduce vs .split.forEach`