Benchmark: Compare foreach - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="1"></div>
<div id="2"></div>
<div id="3"></div>
<div id="4"></div>
<div id="5"></div>
<div id="6"></div>
<div id="7"></div>
<div id="8"></div>
<div id="9"></div>
<div id="10"></div>

Tests:

Foreach 1
const el = document.getElementById('1'); let arr = [el]; arr.forEach(item => function() { item.textContent = 'a'; })
Without Foreach
const el = document.getElementById('1'); el.textContent = 'a';

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Foreach 1
Without Foreach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is created using MeasureThat.net, which allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark defines two test cases:

1. "Compare foreach": This test case compares the performance of two approaches: using `forEach` loop and not using `forEach`.
2. The second test case is similar to the first one but without using the `forEach` loop.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates a simple HTML page with 10 `<div>` elements, each identified by an ID from 1 to 10. This setup serves as a container for the benchmarked code.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **Foreach 1**: This test case uses the `forEach` loop to iterate over an array containing one element, which is a reference to the first `<div>` element on the page.
2. **Without Foreach**: This test case directly updates the text content of the first `<div>` element on the page.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Using `forEach` loop**: This approach uses an array containing one element, which is a reference to the DOM node.
2. **Not using `forEach` loop**: This approach directly updates the text content of the DOM node without using a loop.

**Pros and Cons**

**Using `forEach` loop:**

Pros:

* Simplifies code and reduces verbosity
* Easy to read and maintain

Cons:

* May incur additional overhead due to iteration and function call overhead
* Can lead to slower performance compared to direct DOM manipulation

**Not using `forEach` loop:**

Pros:

* Can be faster since it avoids the overhead of iteration and function calls
* Directly updates the DOM node without creating an intermediate array or object

Cons:

* May make code more verbose and harder to read
* Requires careful consideration of side effects and state changes when updating the DOM directly

**Library and Syntax**

In this benchmark, there is no specific library being used. However, the use of `forEach` loop suggests that it's a standard JavaScript feature.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It's a straightforward comparison between two basic approaches to updating DOM nodes.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to compare the performance of other approaches, here are some alternatives:

* Using `for` loop instead of `forEach`
* Using an array method like `map()` or `reduce()`
* Using a library like jQuery for DOM manipulation
* Using Web Workers for parallel execution

Keep in mind that each alternative will have its own set of pros and cons, and the best approach depends on the specific use case and requirements.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/101.0.4951.67 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 101 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Foreach 1	4311707.5 Ops/sec
Without Foreach	2628804.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Compare foreach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Foreach 1 vs Without Foreach

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Foreach 1

Without Foreach

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):