Benchmark: simple array and map vs forEach vs for by cuteLuna v4

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [{ name: 'luna', id: 3 },{ name: 'abc', id: 4 }, { name: 'eee', id: 3 }]

Tests:

map
const newArr = [] const temp = arr.map((item, index) => { newArr[index] = {label: item.name, id: item.id} })
foreach
const newArr = []; arr.forEach((item, index) => { newArr[index] = {label: item.name, id: item.id} })
for
const arrLength = arr.length; const newArr = []; for (let i = 0; i < arrLength; i++) { newArr[i] = {label: arr[i].name, id: arr[i].id} }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
map
foreach
for

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test on MeasureThat.net, where users can compare the performance of different JavaScript approaches for creating a new array by mapping or iterating over an existing array.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition includes three individual test cases:

1. `map`
2. `foreach`
3. `for`

Each test case has a brief description and code snippets that define the problem to be solved.

**Comparison of Options**

Here's a breakdown of each option, their pros, cons, and other considerations:

1. **`map()`**
	* Pros:
		+ Native JavaScript method
		+ Efficient and concise
		+ Supports modern browsers and Node.js versions
	* Cons:
		+ May have slower performance due to the creation of a new array
		+ Can be less readable for complex transformations
2. **`forEach()`**
	* Pros:
		+ Also native JavaScript method
		+ Efficient and concise
		+ Supports modern browsers and Node.js versions
	* Cons:
		+ May have slower performance due to the creation of a new array
		+ Can be less readable for complex transformations
3. **`for` loop**
	* Pros:
		+ Control over iteration order and termination conditions
		+ Suitable for complex transformations or edge cases
	* Cons:
		+ Requires manual indexing and management of the original array
		+ Can be less efficient than `map()` or `forEach()`

**Library Usage**

There are no libraries used in this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned in this specific benchmark. However, if you're interested in exploring other JavaScript features or syntax, MeasureThat.net offers a wide range of benchmarks that cover various aspects of the language, including:

* Async/await and promises
* Closures and hoisting
* Scopes and context
* Regular expressions

**Other Alternatives**

If you'd like to compare different approaches for creating a new array in JavaScript, here are some alternative methods:

* Using `Array.prototype.reduce()`
* Utilizing `Array.prototype.filter()` with a transformation function
* Leveraging the `spread operator` (`...`) to create a new array
* Employing `Array.from()` with an iterator or callback function

These alternatives can provide different trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and maintainability. MeasureThat.net allows you to explore these options and find the best approach for your specific use case.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 11 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 16_3_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/16.3 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Mobile Safari 16 on iOS 16.3.1

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
map	3620804.2 Ops/sec
foreach	4663195.0 Ops/sec
for	1458387.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

simple array and map vs forEach vs for by cuteLuna v4 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: map vs foreach vs for

Created: 11 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

map

foreach

for

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):