Benchmark: for loop vs. lodash range foreach [2022-11-17]

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Tests:

for
var x = 0; for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { x++; }
lodash range foreach
var x = 0; _.range(10000).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array foreach
var x = 0; Array(10000).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(Array(10000), function (i) { x++; });
lodash range lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(_.range(10000), function (i) { x++; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
lodash range foreach
array foreach
array lodash foreach
lodash range lodash foreach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark compares four different approaches for iterating over arrays: traditional `for` loops, `_.range()` from Lodash, and two variants of `_.forEach()` with arrays as the first argument.

**Test Cases**

1. **For Loop**: This test case uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over an array of 10,000 elements.
2. **Lodash Range ForEach**: This test case uses the `_.range()` function from Lodash to generate an array of 10,000 elements and then iterates over it using `_.forEach()`.
3. **Array Foreach**: This test case creates an array of 10,000 elements and then iterates over it using the `forEach()` method.
4. **Lodash Array ForEach**: This test case uses the `_` object from Lodash to access the `forEach()` method on arrays, and then iterates over a generated array of 10,000 elements using `_.forEach()`.
5. **Lodash Range Lodash ForEach**: This test case is similar to the previous one but uses `_.range()` as the first argument to `_.forEach()`.

**Options Compared**

The four test cases are compared in terms of their performance. The results show that:

* Traditional `for` loops (Test Case 1) are generally faster than using `_.range()` from Lodash (Test Cases 2-3).
* Using arrays as the first argument to `_.forEach()` (Test Cases 4 and 5) is slower than traditional `for` loops.
* The order of operations within the `_.forEach()` method does not significantly impact performance.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* Traditional `for` loops:
	+ Pros: generally faster, more explicit control over iteration
	+ Cons: verbose, may be less readable for complex iterations
* Lodash `_.range()`: provides a convenient way to generate arrays of numbers, but may incur overhead due to function calls.
* Array `forEach()` method:
	+ Pros: concise and readable syntax, easy to use with existing code
	+ Cons: generally slower than traditional `for` loops or optimized Lodash methods

**Lodash Library**

The `_` object from Lodash is a utility library that provides various functions for working with JavaScript data structures. In this benchmark, it's used to generate arrays of numbers using `_.range()` and provide an alias for the `forEach()` method on arrays.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to the traditional `for` loop or optimized Lodash methods, here are a few options:

* Using `Array.prototype.forEach()`: similar to the Array `forEach()` method used in Test Case 3.
* Using `while` loops: can be faster than traditional `for` loops for certain types of iterations.
* Using V8-specific features like `for...of` or `for...in`: may provide performance benefits, but are not supported in all browsers.

Keep in mind that the performance differences between these alternatives may vary depending on the specific use case and JavaScript engine.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/107.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 107 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for	123580.1 Ops/sec
lodash range foreach	18998.4 Ops/sec
array foreach	42553.7 Ops/sec
array lodash foreach	9989.2 Ops/sec
lodash range lodash foreach	8800.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for loop vs. lodash range foreach [2022-11-17] (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for vs lodash range foreach vs array foreach vs array lodash foreach vs lodash range lodash foreach

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for

lodash range foreach

array foreach

array lodash foreach

lodash range lodash foreach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):