Benchmark: for loop vs. lodash range foreach, lodash 4.16.0

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

Tests:

for
var x = 0; for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { x++; }
lodash range foreach
var x = 0; _.range(10000).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array foreach
var x = 0; Array(10000).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(Array(10000), function (i) { x++; });
lodash range lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(_.range(10000), function (i) { x++; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
lodash range foreach
array foreach
array lodash foreach
lodash range lodash foreach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined in the JSON object as:
```json
"Name": "for loop vs. lodash range foreach, lodash 4.16.0",
```
This benchmark compares the performance of a traditional `for` loop with two variations using Lodash's `forEach` function:

1. `lodash range foreach`: Using `_.range(10000)` to generate an array and then iterating over it with `_.forEach`.
2. `array foreach`: Directly iterating over an array created with `Array(10000)`.
3. `array lodash foreach`: Passing a generator function (`.range`) to `_.forEach` as the second argument.
4. `lodash range lodash foreach`: Using both `_.range` and `.forEach` in combination.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for working with arrays, objects, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash's `_.range` function generates an array of numbers from 0 to the specified length, and `_.forEach` iterates over the array, applying a callback function to each element.

**Options Compared**

The four options compared in this benchmark are:

1. **Traditional `for` loop**: A classic loop that increments a variable (`i`) until it reaches a predetermined value.
2. **Lodash `lodash range foreach`**: Uses `_.range(10000)` to generate an array and then iterates over it with `_.forEach`.
3. **Array `foreach`**: Directly iterates over an array created with `Array(10000)`.
4. **Array Lodash `foreach`**: Passes a generator function (`.range`) to `_.forEach` as the second argument.
5. **Lodash `lodash range lodash foreach`**: Uses both `_.range` and `.forEach` in combination.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Traditional `for` loop**:
	* Pros: Simple, straightforward, and efficient for small arrays.
	* Cons: Can be cumbersome to write for large arrays or complex iterations.
2. **Lodash `lodash range foreach`**: Easy to use and flexible, but may incur overhead due to Lodash's complexity.
3. **Array `foreach`**:
	* Pros: Simple and intuitive, no external dependencies required.
	* Cons: Requires creating an array of the desired length, which can be inefficient for large values.
4. **Array Lodash `foreach`**: Conveniently combines an iterator with Lodash's utility functions.
5. **Lodash `lodash range lodash foreach`**:
	* Pros: Combines the benefits of both approaches, but may introduce additional overhead.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these options, consider factors such as:

* The specific requirements of your project (e.g., performance-critical loops).
* Your familiarity with Lodash and its functions.
* The complexity of your iteration logic.

Now that we've broken down the benchmark, let's look at some alternative approaches:

* **Using `forEach` directly**: Instead of using a loop or array-based approach, you can iterate over an array using `forEach`. This option avoids creating intermediate data structures but may be less efficient.
* **Using `map()` and reducing()`**: If you need to perform multiple operations on each element, consider using `map()` followed by a reduction function (e.g., `reduce()`, `some()`, or `every()`).

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_5) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/12.1.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 12 on Mac OS X 10.14.5

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for	294117.8 Ops/sec
lodash range foreach	17089.8 Ops/sec
array foreach	4047.3 Ops/sec
array lodash foreach	46982.7 Ops/sec
lodash range lodash foreach	16044.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for loop vs. lodash range foreach, lodash 4.16.0 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for vs lodash range foreach vs array foreach vs array lodash foreach vs lodash range lodash foreach

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for

lodash range foreach

array foreach

array lodash foreach

lodash range lodash foreach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):