Benchmark: ForOfFor - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var things = [...Array(100)].map((_, i) => 'k'+i);

Tests:

for of
let r1 = ''; for (const thing of things) { r1 += thing; }
for
let r2 = ''; for (let i = 0, length = things.length; i < length; ++i) { r2 += things[i]; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for of
for

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/14.1.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 14 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for of	1539542.9 Ops/sec
for	257731.1 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON for MeasureThat.net and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark definition represents a JavaScript microbenchmark. It provides information about the benchmark:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark, "ForOfFor".
* `Description`: An empty string, indicating no description is provided.
* `Script Preparation Code`: A code snippet that prepares the environment for the benchmark. In this case, it creates an array of 100 strings using the `Array` constructor and the `map()` method, then assigns each string to a variable `thing`.
* `Html Preparation Code`: An empty string, indicating no HTML preparation is needed.

**Individual Test Cases**
Two test cases are defined:

1. **"for of"`**: This test case executes the following code:
```javascript
let r1 = '';
for (const thing of things) {
    r1 += thing;
}
```
This code uses a `for...of` loop to iterate over the `things` array and concatenates each string to `r1`.

2. **"for"`**: This test case executes the following code:
```javascript
let r2 = '';
for (let i = 0, length = things.length; i < length; ++i) {
    r2 += things[i];
}
```
This code uses a traditional `for` loop with an index variable `i` to iterate over the `things` array and concatenates each string to `r2`.

**Comparison of Options**

The benchmark compares two approaches:

1. **`for...of`**: This approach is often preferred for its simplicity, readability, and performance advantages over traditional `for` loops.
2. **Traditional `for` loop**: This approach can be more complex and verbose than `for...of`, but it provides fine-grained control over the iteration process.

**Pros and Cons**

**`for...of`**:

* Pros:
	+ Simpler syntax
	+ Performance advantages due to optimized iterator implementation
	+ Easier to read and maintain
* Cons:
	+ Limited control over iteration (e.g., indexing)

**Traditional `for` loop**:

* Pros:
	+ Fine-grained control over iteration
	+ Can be more efficient for certain use cases
* Cons:
	+ Verbose syntax
	+ More complex to read and maintain

**Other Considerations**

* The `for...of` loop is generally preferred due to its performance advantages, but traditional `for` loops are still valid and may be necessary in specific situations.
* The benchmark's results show that the `for...of` loop outperforms the traditional `for` loop, which aligns with general expectations.
* MeasureThat.net aims to provide a fair comparison of different JavaScript approaches, allowing developers to choose the best option for their use cases.

**Libraries and Special Features**

No libraries are explicitly mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. However, the `Array.prototype.map()` method is used to create the array of strings, which is a part of the JavaScript standard library.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The `for...of` loop syntax is a modern feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It's designed for iterating over arrays and other iterable objects, providing a more concise and readable way to write loops.

Related benchmarks:

ForOfFor (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for of vs for

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for of

for

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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