Benchmark: map vs forEach schnelligkeit

Tests:

map
const container = []; for(let i=0; i<1000000; i++){ const randomValue = Math.floor((Math.random() * 10) + 1); container.push({1: randomValue}); } const result = []; container.map(c => result.push(c["1"]));
forEach
const container = []; for(let i=0; i<1000000; i++){ const randomValue = Math.floor((Math.random() * 10) + 1); container.push({1: randomValue}); } const result = []; container.map(c => result.push(c["1"]));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
map
forEach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.80 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 86 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
map	2.1 Ops/sec
forEach	2.1 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark tests two different approaches to iterate over an array of objects in JavaScript: `map()` and `forEach()`. The test case consists of creating an array of 1 million objects with random values, and then using each method to push a specific value from each object into another array.

**Options compared**

In this case, the two options being compared are:

1. `map()`: This method creates a new array by calling a provided function on every element in the original array.
2. `forEach()`: This method calls a provided function on every element in the original array, but it does not create a new array.

**Pros and cons of each approach**

* **`map()`**:
	+ Pros: It creates a new array with the transformed values, which can be useful for various tasks like filtering or transforming data.
	+ Cons: It requires creating a new array, which can consume more memory. In this test case, it also pushes elements onto an existing array, which might lead to performance issues if the original array is large.
* **`forEach()`**:
	+ Pros: It does not create a new array, making it potentially more efficient in terms of memory usage.
	+ Cons: It modifies the original array by pushing elements onto it. If the array is large and needs to be preserved for future use, this might not be the best choice.

**Library used**

In neither test case is a library explicitly mentioned. However, the `Math.random()` function is used to generate random values, which is part of the built-in JavaScript functionality.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

The benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would impact its execution or understanding. It only uses standard JavaScript functions and data types.

Now, let's discuss alternative approaches:

1. **`for...of` loop**: This loop is another way to iterate over arrays in modern JavaScript. However, it's not being used in this benchmark.
2. **`reduce()` method**: This method can be used to accumulate values from an array, but it's not suitable for this specific use case.
3. **Native Web Workers**: If the test were designed to measure parallel execution or performance benefits of using Web Workers, that would be a different story.

In summary, the benchmark compares two common approaches to iterate over arrays in JavaScript: `map()` and `forEach()`. The choice between these methods depends on the specific requirements of your project, such as memory usage concerns or the need for data transformation.

Related benchmarks:

map vs forEach schnelligkeit (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: map vs forEach

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

map

forEach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):