Benchmark: teste de fors - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://developers.google.com/speed/libraries/devguide#jquery"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var array = new Array ();
for (var i=0; i<10000; i++) {
    array[i] = 0;
}

Tests:

jQuery
console.time('jquery'); $.each (array, function (i) { array[i] = i; }); console.timeEnd('jquery');
Js
console.time('native'); var l = array.length; for (var i=0;i<l; i++) { array[i] = i; } console.timeEnd('native');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jQuery
Js

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_11_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/53.0.2785.116 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 53 on Mac OS X 10.11.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jQuery	854.5 Ops/sec
Js	1127.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two individual test cases, each measuring the performance of iterating over an array using different methods: jQuery's `$.each` and native JavaScript's `for` loop.

**Options compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **jQuery's `$.each`**: This method iterates over an array by executing a callback function for each element. The callback function receives the current index (`i`) as an argument.
2. **Native JavaScript's `for` loop**: This method uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over an array, incrementing a counter variable (`i`) that represents the current index.

**Pros and Cons**

* **jQuery's `$.each`**:
	+ Pros: concise and readable code, eliminates manual indexing issues.
	+ Cons: might introduce additional overhead due to function call overhead and memory allocation for the callback function.
* **Native JavaScript's `for` loop**:
	+ Pros: generally faster and more lightweight, as it avoids the overhead of a function call and memory allocation.
	+ Cons: requires manual indexing and can lead to bugs if not implemented correctly.

**Library used**

The test uses jQuery, which is a popular JavaScript library for simplifying DOM manipulation and event handling. In this case, it's used for its `$.each` method, which provides an easy way to iterate over arrays without manual indexing.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

There isn't any special or experimental JavaScript syntax being used in this benchmark. The code is standard JavaScript, using only the built-in `Array` and `for` loop constructs.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to test other iteration methods, some alternatives could include:

* Using `forEach()` instead of `$.each`
* Implementing a custom iterator function
* Using Web Workers or parallel processing techniques
* Testing other libraries like Lodash or Ramda

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be directly comparable to the native JavaScript `for` loop and jQuery's `$.each`, as they may introduce additional overhead or complexity.

I hope this explanation helps! Let me know if you have any further questions.

Related benchmarks:

teste de fors (version: 0)

Teste de foreach jquery e nativo

Comparing performance of: jQuery vs Js

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jQuery

Js

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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