Benchmark: 1363254132431453543542435642653465243652

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 12345; i++) {
  arr[i] = i;
}

function someFn(i) {
  return (i * 3 * 8 / 1200 * 0.002 / 40 * 0.2);
}

Tests:

map
let array = arr.map(item => someFn(item));
for
let array = []; for (var j = 0; j < arr.length; j++) { array.push(someFn(arr[j])); }
for of
let array = []; for (const elt of arr) { array.push(someFn(elt)); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
map
for
for of

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/95.0.4638.54 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 95 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
map	810.5 Ops/sec
for	338.5 Ops/sec
for of	796.3 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 and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons of those approaches, library usage, special JS features, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition JSON contains metadata about the benchmark:

* `Name`: A unique identifier for the benchmark.
* `Description`: Not provided in this example.
* `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`: These codes are used to prepare the environment before running the benchmark. In this case, the script preparation code creates an array `arr` with 12345 elements, each initialized to its index value, and defines a function `someFn`. The Html preparation code is not provided.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. **map**
	* Benchmark Definition: `let array = arr.map(item => someFn(item));`
	* This line uses the `map()` method to create a new array with the result of applying `someFn` to each element in the original array.
2. **for**
	* Benchmark Definition: `let array = [];\r\nfor (var j = 0; j < arr.length; j++) {\r\n  array.push(someFn(arr[j]));\r\n}`
	* This line uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the elements of the original array, applying `someFn` to each element and pushing the result onto a new array.
3. **for of**
	* Benchmark Definition: `let array = [];\r\nfor (const elt of arr) {\r\n  array.push(someFn(elt));\r\n}`
	* This line uses an iterable, created by converting the original array to an iterator using the `of` keyword, and iterates over its elements. For each element, it applies `someFn` and pushes the result onto a new array.

**Options Compared**

The three test cases compare different approaches to map operations:

1. **map()**: Uses the built-in `map()` method, which is optimized for performance.
2. **Traditional `for` loop**: Uses a traditional `for` loop with manual iteration over the elements.
3. **`of` keyword**: Uses an iterable created by converting the array to an iterator using the `of` keyword.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **map()**
	* Pros:
		+ Optimized for performance.
		+ Concise code.
	* Cons:
		+ May have higher overhead due to the use of a built-in method.
2. **Traditional `for` loop**
	* Pros:
		+ Low overhead.
		+ Easy to understand and maintain.
	* Cons:
		+ Inefficient for large datasets, as it requires manual iteration over each element.
3. **`of` keyword**
	* Pros:
		+ Efficient for iterating over arrays, as it avoids manual indexing.
		+ Concise code.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be supported in older browsers or environments.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in the provided JSON, but the `map()` method is a built-in part of the JavaScript language.

**Special JS Features**

There are no special JavaScript features explicitly mentioned in the provided code snippets. However, it's worth noting that the use of `for...of` loops and the `of` keyword is relatively recent additions to the JavaScript standard library (ECMAScript 2015+).

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark script preparation code creates a large array with random values, which may be optimized by modern JavaScript engines.
* The benchmark uses a simple function `someFn` that performs a basic calculation. In a real-world scenario, this would likely be replaced with more complex logic or optimizations specific to the application.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches or want to explore other optimization techniques, consider the following:

1. **Native Web Workers**: Use web workers to offload computationally intensive tasks and reduce memory usage.
2. ** SIMD (Single Instruction, Multiple Data) Instructions**: Take advantage of SIMD instructions on modern CPUs to perform similar calculations in parallel.
3. **Optimized JavaScript Libraries**: Utilize optimized libraries like NumJS or Mathjs for numerical computations, which can provide better performance than native JavaScript implementations.
4. **Native Compilation**: Consider compiling your code to machine code using tools like Emscripten or V8, but be aware of the overhead and limitations involved.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own trade-offs and requirements, and it's essential to evaluate the best approach for your specific use case and performance needs.

Related benchmarks:

1363254132431453543542435642653465243652 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: map vs for vs for of

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

map

for

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):