Benchmark: Array loop vs foreach vs map sdadasdsa 2 - no func

Script Preparation code:

   var arr = [];
    for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
      arr[i] = i;
    }

Tests:

foreach
arr.forEach(function (item){ item * 3 * 8 })
for
for (let i = 0; i < arr.lenght; i++) { arr[i] * 3 * 8 }
map
arr.map(item => item * 3 * 8)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
foreach
for
map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Understanding the Benchmark**

The provided benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three different approaches for iterating over an array in JavaScript: `forEach`, `for` loop, and `map`. The test case uses a small array of 10,000 elements, with each element initialized to its index value.

**Comparison Options**

1. **foreach**: Uses the `forEach` method to iterate over the array.
2. **for**: Uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the array.
3. **map**: Uses the `map` method to transform and return an array of new values from the original array.

**Pros and Cons**

* **foreach**:
	+ Pros: Easy to read, concise syntax.
	+ Cons: Can be slower than other approaches due to function call overhead.
* **for**:
	+ Pros: Fast, straightforward syntax.
	+ Cons: More verbose, requires manual index management.
* **map**:
	+ Pros: Concise syntax, can be parallelized for better performance (although this is not tested here).
	+ Cons: May not be as readable as other approaches, and its behavior can lead to unexpected results if the transformation function modifies the original array.

**Library Usage**

None of the provided test cases use any external libraries. However, it's worth noting that the `map` method relies on the `Array.prototype.map()` method implementation in JavaScript, which is a part of the standard library.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None of the test cases explicitly use special features or syntax like async/await, arrow functions, or decorators. If they did, I would need to explain them, but in this case, the code uses traditional function syntax.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to explore alternative approaches, here are a few examples:

* **Loomeshift**: A parallelization library for JavaScript that can be used with the `map` method to achieve better performance.
* **Array.prototype.every()`: An iterative approach using the `every()` method instead of `forEach`.
* **Array.prototype.reduce()`: An accumulator-based approach using the `reduce()` method instead of `forEach`.

Please note that these alternatives are not tested in this specific benchmark, and their performance might vary depending on the specific use case.

In summary, the provided benchmark compares three common approaches for iterating over an array in JavaScript: `forEach`, `for` loop, and `map`. The results show that the traditional `for` loop is likely to be the fastest approach, followed by `foreach` and then `map`.

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/99.0.4844.84 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 99 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
foreach	4831.7 Ops/sec
for	7319764.5 Ops/sec
map	4586.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Array loop vs foreach vs map sdadasdsa 2 - no func (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: foreach vs for vs map

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

foreach

for

map

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):