Benchmark: for-break vs every

Script Preparation code:

 var array = Array.from({length: 100000});
 let variable = 0;

Tests:

for-break
for (let i = 0; i <= array.length; i++) { variable = array[i]; if (variable > 50000) { break; } }
every
array.every((value) => { variable = value; if (variable > 50000) { return false; } return true; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for-break
every

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 dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches: `for` loop with a break statement (`for-break`) and the `every()` method (`every`). The test case is designed to iterate over an array of 100,000 elements and check if any element exceeds 50,000. For the `for` loop, it increments the variable until it finds an element that meets the condition, while for the `every()` method, it checks each element in sequence.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **For Loop with Break Statement (`for-break`)**: This approach uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the array, incrementing the variable until it finds an element that exceeds 50,000 and breaks out of the loop.
2. **Every() Method (`every`)**: This approach uses the `every()` method, which takes a callback function as an argument. The callback function is applied to each element in the array, and if any element returns false, the entire array returns false.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

* **For Loop with Break Statement (`for-break`)**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster for small arrays or when only one element needs to be checked.
	+ Cons: Can lead to off-by-one errors if not implemented correctly, as it increments until it finds a match, which may not cover the entire range of possible values.
* **Every() Method (`every`)**:
	+ Pros: More concise and expressive, reduces chance of off-by-one errors, and can handle arrays of any size.
	+ Cons: May be slower for very large arrays due to the overhead of calling a function for each element.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, the `Array.from()` method is used to create an array from an object with a specified length. This is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax**

There are no special features or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Alternative Approaches**

Some alternative approaches could be:

1. **Using `includes()` method**: Instead of using a loop, you can use the `includes()` method to check if any element exceeds 50,000.
2. **Using `some()` method**: Similar to `every()`, but returns as soon as it finds an element that meets the condition.
3. **Manual iteration with callback functions**: You could iterate over the array manually using a loop and call a function for each element.

However, these alternatives may not be directly comparable to the `for-break` and `every()` methods in terms of performance or expressiveness.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/118.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 118 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for-break	41.4 Ops/sec
every	56.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for-break vs every (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for-break vs every

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for-break

every

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):