Benchmark: for vs foreach vs some big

Script Preparation code:

var array = new Array(10000);

Tests:

for
for (var i = 0; i < array.length; i++) { array[i]; }
foreach
array.forEach(function(item, index) { return item; });
some
array.some(function(item, index) { return item === array[index]; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
foreach
some

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 of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case on MeasureThat.net, which compares the performance of three different loop types: `for`, `forEach`, and `some`. The benchmark aims to evaluate which loop type is the most efficient.

**Loop Options Compared**

1. **For Loop**: This traditional loop structure uses an explicit counter variable (`i`) to iterate over the array elements.
2. **ForEach Loop**: This loop structure iterates over an array using a callback function, where each element in the array is processed one by one.
3. **Some Loop**: This loop structure returns `true` as soon as it finds an element in the array that satisfies the condition.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **For Loop**:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient because it avoids the overhead of function calls.
	* Cons: Requires manual incrementing of a counter variable, which can lead to off-by-one errors if not handled correctly.
2. **ForEach Loop**:
	* Pros: Encapsulates the iteration logic in a concise and expressive way, reducing code duplication.
	* Cons: May incur performance overhead due to function call overhead and potential caching issues.
3. **Some Loop**:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient because it stops iterating as soon as it finds the first matching element.
	* Cons: May not terminate if no elements satisfy the condition, leading to unnecessary iterations.

**Library Used**

None of the provided loop definitions rely on any external libraries. However, MeasureThat.net itself uses a library for collecting and analyzing benchmark results, but this is not related to the test case being compared.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None of the provided loop definitions use any special JavaScript features or syntax, such as `let`/`const`, `arrow functions`, or modernization techniques like async/await.

**Benchmark Results Interpretation**

The latest benchmark results show that:

* The `some` loop performs significantly better (higher executions per second) than the other two loops.
* The `for` loop outperforms the `forEach` loop, indicating that the overhead of function calls might be more significant in this case.

These results suggest that the `some` loop is likely to be the most efficient due to its ability to stop iterating early. However, it's essential to note that these results might vary depending on specific use cases and optimization strategies.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative loop structures or performance optimizations, here are a few options:

1. **While Loop**: A `while` loop can be used instead of a `for` loop, especially when the number of iterations is not known beforehand.
2. **Array.prototype.every()`: This method iterates over an array and returns `true` as soon as all elements satisfy the condition, similar to the `some` loop but with a different behavior.
3. **Generator Functions**: Generator functions can be used to implement iterative logic in a concise and expressive way, potentially offering better performance benefits than traditional loops.

Keep in mind that performance optimizations should always be grounded in understanding the specific requirements of your use case and the characteristics of your target audience.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_4) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/74.0.3729.108 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 74 on Mac OS X 10.14.4

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for	905.4 Ops/sec
foreach	65039.4 Ops/sec
some	65423.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for vs foreach vs some big (version: 0)

Compare loop performance

Comparing performance of: for vs foreach vs some

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for

foreach

some

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):