Benchmark: test for of loop

Tests:

test1
const project_list = []; const DD_projects = Array.from(Array(10000000).keys()); for (let item of DD_projects) { project_list.push({ text: item, value: item, languages: item, prefix: item, }) }
test2
const project_list = []; const DD_projects = Array.from(Array(10000000).keys()); DD_projects.forEach((item)=>( project_list.push({ text: item, value: item, languages: item, prefix: item, }) ))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test1
test2

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 JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JavaScript script that creates an array of 10 million items, each with four properties: `text`, `value`, `languages`, and `prefix`. The script uses two different methods to push these objects into the `project_list` array:

1. **For-of loop**: This method iterates over the `DD_projects` array using a for-of loop, where each iteration creates an object with the specified properties and pushes it into the `project_list`.
2. **forEach() method**: This method uses the `Array.prototype.forEach()` method to iterate over the `DD_projects` array, where each iteration also creates an object with the specified properties and pushes it into the `project_list`.

**Options being compared**

The two methods being compared are:

1. For-of loop
2. forEach() method

These methods have different pros and cons:

* **For-of loop**:
	+ Pros: Can be more efficient since it avoids the overhead of function calls associated with forEach().
	+ Cons: May not work as expected for arrays created dynamically, as it's designed to iterate over existing elements.
* **forEach() method**:
	+ Pros: Works well with arrays created dynamically and is widely supported across browsers.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of function calls.

**Other considerations**

There are other factors that might affect performance:

* Array size: With 10 million items, memory allocation and garbage collection become significant concerns. The browser's garbage collector will likely have a hard time keeping track of all the objects.
* Browser optimizations: Modern browsers often implement various optimizations for array operations, such as loop unrolling or caching frequently accessed elements.

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library usage in these benchmark definitions.

**Special JS features/syntax**

None of these benchmarks use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would affect performance. They are straightforward implementations of basic iteration techniques.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to compare other iteration methods, some alternatives could be:

* **Array.prototype.map()**: This method creates a new array by applying a provided function to each element of the original array.
* **Array.prototype.reduce()**: This method applies a provided function to each element in an array, accumulating a result.

These methods might offer different performance characteristics compared to for-of loops and forEach().

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
test1	1.4 Ops/sec
test2	1.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test for of loop (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: test1 vs test2

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

test1

test2

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):