Benchmark: for & while & for in

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var values = [1,2,3,4,4,5,6,7,7,8,89,9,7,6,5,4,43,3,23,2,2,2];

Tests:

for
const l = values.length; let i = 0; let a = 0; for(;i<l;++i){ a = values[i]; }
while
let l = values.length; let a = 0; while(l){ --l; a = values[l]; }
for in
for(const i in values){ a = i; }
for of
for(const i of values){ a = values[i]; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
while
for in
for of

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/95.0.4638.54 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 95 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for	396006.0 Ops/sec
while	384949.1 Ops/sec
for in	139044.8 Ops/sec
for of	128274.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested:**

MeasureThat.net is testing the performance of different JavaScript loops (foreach) in a microbenchmark scenario.

Specifically, the test cases are designed to measure the execution speed of:

1. Traditional `for` loop
2. `while` loop
3. `for...in` loop
4. `for...of` loop

**Comparison of options:**

The four loops have different approaches to iterate over an array of values. Here's a brief overview of each option, their pros and cons:

1. **Traditional `for` loop**:
	* Syntax: `for (var i = 0; i < length; i++) { var value = arr[i]; }`
	* Pros: Easy to understand, simple syntax.
	* Cons: Requires manual increment/decrement of the index variable, can be error-prone if not done correctly.
2. **`while` loop**:
	* Syntax: `var i = 0; while (i < length) { var value = arr[i]; i++; }`
	* Pros: Flexible and easy to implement, no need to worry about index incrementation.
	* Cons: Can be slower than traditional `for` loop due to the overhead of condition checks and incrementation.
3. **`for...in` loop**:
	* Syntax: `for (var i in arr) { var value = arr[i]; }`
	* Pros: Convenient for iterating over arrays with named properties, can be faster than traditional `for` loop due to compiler optimizations.
	* Cons: Not designed for arrays, will iterate over all properties of the array object, including inherited ones. Can lead to unexpected behavior if not used carefully.
4. **`for...of` loop** (introduced in ECMAScript 2015):
	* Syntax: `for (var i of arr) { var value = arr[i]; }`
	* Pros: Simple and concise syntax, designed specifically for iterating over arrays and other iterable objects.
	* Cons: Only available in modern browsers that support ES6+.

**Library usage:**

In the provided benchmark, `lodash` is loaded as a dependency through the HTML preparation code:
```html
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>
```
`Lodash` is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for working with arrays, strings, objects, and more. In this case, it's likely used to initialize the `values` array.

**Special JS features or syntax:**

None are mentioned in the provided benchmark definitions.

**Other alternatives:**

If you want to test different loop implementations or explore other performance optimization techniques, you could consider adding additional test cases, such as:

* Using a different array data structure (e.g., linked list, tree)
* Employing parallel processing or concurrent execution
* Utilizing Web Workers for offloading computation
* Experimenting with different caching strategies or memoization techniques

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives will introduce new complexities and potential biases, so it's essential to carefully evaluate the trade-offs before adding them to your benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

for & while & for in (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: for vs while vs for in vs for of

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

for

while

for in

for of

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):