Benchmark: string characters split map vs for loop vs split foreach

Tests:

split map
const string = 'asdf1234qwer'; const mapper = (char) => String.fromCharCode(char.charCodeAt(0)) string.split('').map(mapper).join('')
for loop
const string = 'asdf1234qwer'; const mapper = (char) => String.fromCharCode(char.charCodeAt(0)) let result = "" for(const char of string) { result += mapper(char) }
split foreach
const string = 'asdf1234qwer'; const mapper = (char) => String.fromCharCode(char.charCodeAt(0)) let result = '' string.split('').forEach(char => { result += mapper(char) })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
split map
for loop
split foreach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three approaches to process a string of characters: using `map`, `for loop`, and `forEach` with a custom function `mapper`. The goal is to determine which approach is the fastest.

**Approaches Compared**

1. **Map**: This approach uses the `map()` method, which applies a given function to each element of an array (in this case, the characters in the string) and returns a new array.
2. **For Loop**: This approach uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the characters in the string and applies the custom `mapper` function to each character.
3. **ForEach**: This approach uses the `forEach()` method, which executes a given function for each element of an array (in this case, the characters in the string).

**Pros and Cons**

* **Map**:
	+ Pros: Concise and readable code, efficient use of memory.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to array creation and iteration.
* **For Loop**:
	+ Pros: Control over each iteration, can be faster for small arrays or complex logic.
	+ Cons: More verbose code, less readable, and may lead to errors if not implemented correctly.
* **ForEach**:
	+ Pros: Easy to read and write, efficient use of memory.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of function calls.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, no external libraries are used. However, the `String.fromCharCode()` method is used to convert each character code to its corresponding ASCII value.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are being used in these benchmarks.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few:

* **Regular Expressions**: You can use regular expressions to process the string, which may be faster for certain tasks.
* **Array.prototype.reduce()**: Another approach is to use `reduce()` method, which combines the results of an array processing function into a single output value.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The preparation code is empty in this case, as no setup or initialization is required for these benchmarks. The focus is solely on measuring the execution time of each approach.

Now that we've gone through the benchmark, it's clear that this comparison aims to highlight the trade-offs between using `map`, `for loop`, and `forEach` with a custom function in JavaScript.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Android 14; Mobile; rv:131.0) Gecko/131.0 Firefox/131.0

Browser/OS: Firefox Mobile 131 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
split map	1529962.9 Ops/sec
for loop	1549646.0 Ops/sec
split foreach	1254231.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

string characters split map vs for loop vs split foreach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: split map vs for loop vs split foreach

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

split map

for loop

split foreach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):