Benchmark: find() vs for...of vs for-ggggloop

HTML Preparation code:

<div id='test'></div>

Tests:

for-loop
var arr = ['hello', 'a', 'b']; for(i=0; i<arr.length; i++){ var value = arr[i]; if (value === 'b') { return value; } }
for..of
var arr = ['hello', 'a', 'b']; for (var value of arr) { if (value === 'b') { return value; } }
Array.find()
var arr = ['hello', 'a', 'b']; let val = arr.find(node => node.id === 'b');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for-loop
for..of
Array.find()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark test cases.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three different approaches for finding a specific value in an array:

1. **For loop**: A traditional, hand-crafted loop using a counter (`i`) to iterate through the array.
2. **For...of loop**: A modern, concise way to iterate over arrays using the `for...of` syntax.
3. **Array.find() method**: A built-in JavaScript method for finding the first element in an array that satisfies a condition.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these three approaches:

* For loop: Iterates through the array using a counter, checks each value, and returns as soon as it finds the desired value.
* For...of loop: Uses the `for...of` syntax to iterate over the array, which is more concise but potentially slower due to overhead from JavaScript engines.
* Array.find(): A built-in method that iterates through the array until it finds a match or reaches the end of the array.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **For loop**: Pros:
	* Control and flexibility
	* Can be optimized for specific use cases
	Cons:
	* Verbose and error-prone if not implemented carefully
2. **For...of loop**: Pros:
	* Concise and readable syntax
	* Less prone to errors than traditional loops
	Cons:
	* Potentially slower due to JavaScript engine overhead
3. **Array.find() method**:
	+ Pros: High-level, concise API, efficient iteration.
	+ Cons: May incur additional overhead due to the use of a built-in method.

**Library Usage**

None of these benchmark test cases explicitly uses any external libraries, but they rely on the JavaScript engine and its built-in methods (e.g., `Array.find()`).

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The benchmark makes use of the following special features:

1. **For...of loop**: The modern syntax for iterating over arrays.
2. **Array.find() method**: A built-in JavaScript method.

These features are widely supported across most browsers, but it's essential to note that some older browsers may not support these new syntaxes or methods.

**Other Alternatives**

If the benchmark were to be modified or extended, other alternatives could include:

1. Using a different data structure (e.g., linked lists, trees).
2. Implementing custom searching algorithms (e.g., binary search, hash-based lookup).
3. Comparing performance using other metrics (e.g., memory usage, cache misses).

Keep in mind that the primary focus of this benchmark is to compare the performance of three different approaches for finding a specific value in an array.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.5060.114 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for-loop	123065168.0 Ops/sec
for..of	123892360.0 Ops/sec
Array.find()	89315448.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

find() vs for...of vs for-ggggloop (version: 0)

Testing the difference between native loops and find()

Comparing performance of: for-loop vs for..of vs Array.find()

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for-loop

for..of

Array.find()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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