var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
arr[i] = i;
}
arr.forEach(function (item){
item = item * 3 * 8
})
for (let i = 0; i < arr.lenght; i++) {
arr[i] = arr[i] * 3 * 8
}
arr.map(item => item = item * 3 * 8)
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
foreach | |
for | |
map |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
foreach | 37689.5 Ops/sec |
for | 11700092.0 Ops/sec |
map | 18263.6 Ops/sec |
I'd be happy to help explain the provided benchmark!
What is being tested?
The provided benchmark tests three different approaches for iterating over an array in JavaScript:
for
loop that iterates over the array using an index variable.forEach()
: The forEach()
method, which calls a function for each element in the array.map()
: The map()
method, which creates a new array with the results of applying a given function to each element.Options compared
The benchmark compares the performance of these three approaches on an array of 10,000 elements, where each element is initialized with its index value multiplied by 3 and then multiplied by 8.
Pros and Cons of each approach
forEach()
:map()
:forEach()
due to the creation of an intermediate array.Library usage
None of the provided benchmarks use any libraries or external dependencies. They only utilize built-in JavaScript features.
Special JS feature/syntax
The map()
method uses a shorthand syntax, specifically the arrow function (item => item = item * 3 * 8
), which is a concise way to define a small anonymous function. This syntax was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and has since become widely adopted.
Other alternatives
For comparing performance in JavaScript, other approaches might include:
reduce()
: Similar to map()
, but returns a single value instead of an array.filter()
: Removes elements from the array based on a given condition.at()
, fill()
, and set()
, which can be faster than using JavaScript methods.Keep in mind that the performance of these alternatives may vary depending on the specific use case, browser, and hardware.