Benchmark: Array fill method vs for loop test z

Tests:

For Loop fill
let arrayTest = new Array(1000); for (let i = 0; i < arrayTest.length; i++){ arrayTest[i] = 0; }
Array Fill
let arrayTest = new Array(1000).fill(0);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
For Loop fill
Array Fill

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 2 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark defined in the provided JSON tests the performance of two different methods for filling an array with a specified value—in this case, the number `0`. The two approaches being compared are the traditional for loop and the `Array.prototype.fill` method.

### Options Being Compared
1. **For Loop Fill**: 
    - **Code**: 
      ```javascript
      let arrayTest = new Array(1000);
      for (let i = 0; i < arrayTest.length; i++) {
          arrayTest[i] = 0;
      }
      ```
    - **Description**: This method initializes an array of 1000 elements and then iterates through each index using a for loop to assign the value `0`.

2. **Array Fill**:
    - **Code**: 
      ```javascript
      let arrayTest = new Array(1000).fill(0);
      ```
    - **Description**: This method creates an array of 1000 elements and uses the `fill` method to assign `0` to each index.

### Pros and Cons of Each Approach

1. **For Loop Fill**:
   - **Pros**:
     - Flexibility: The for loop allows for more complex operations during the iteration if needed (e.g., assigning different values based on conditions).
     - Can be more controlled when a custom index logic is required.
   - **Cons**:
     - Verbosity: It requires more lines of code to accomplish the same task.
     - Potential for off-by-one errors when iterating.

2. **Array Fill**:
   - **Pros**:
     - Conciseness: The `fill` method was designed to perform this task in a single line of code, which improves readability.
     - Performance: In optimized JavaScript engines, built-in methods like `Array.prototype.fill` can be more efficient because they may be implemented using lower-level optimizations not accessible in user-written loops.
   - **Cons**:
     - Limited to filling the array with a single value. More complex filling logic would require a different approach.

### Benchmarking Results
According to the benchmark test result, the **For Loop fill** achieved approximately **97,704** executions per second, while the **Array Fill** method reached around **94,736** executions per second. This indicates that in this specific test in this environment, the for loop was slightly faster.

### Other Considerations
- **Browser and Device Influence**: The results may vary based on the environment where the tests are executed. Different JavaScript engines or even hardware configurations can significantly impact performance due to how they optimize array operations.
- **Use Case**: For most cases where you need to fill an array with a single value, `Array.prototype.fill` is generally preferred for its readability and maintainability. Use of the for loop might typically be reserved for more complex scenarios.

### Alternatives
1. **Using `Array.from`**: 
   ```javascript
   let arrayTest = Array.from({ length: 1000 }, () => 0);
   ```
   This alternative creates a new array using a mapping function to fill it with the value `0`. It's no longer simply filling but dynamically generating the array.

2. **Spread Operator in combination with `map`** (available in more recent JavaScript versions):
   ```javascript
   let arrayTest = [...Array(1000)].map(() => 0);
   ```
   This uses the spread syntax to create an array and then immediately fills it using `map`.

In summary, the benchmark focuses on two ways of performing a task that is commonplace in JavaScript programming. While the for loop shows slightly better performance in this specific test, the built-in `fill` method has advantages in terms of syntax simplicity and maintainability. Decisions on which method to use should consider readability, maintainability, and specific performance needs.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Android 15; Mobile; rv:132.0) Gecko/132.0 Firefox/132.0

Browser/OS: Firefox Mobile 132 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
For Loop fill	97704.9 Ops/sec
Array Fill	94736.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Array fill method vs for loop test z (version: 1)

Array fill method vs for loop performance validation

Comparing performance of: For Loop fill vs Array Fill

Created: 2 days ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

For Loop fill

Array Fill

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 2 days ago):