var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
arr[i] = i;
}
function someFn(i) {
return i * 3 * 8;
}
arr.forEach(function (item){
someFn(item);
})
for (var i = 0, len = arr.length; i < len; i++) {
someFn(arr[i]);
}
arr.map(item => someFn(item))
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
foreach | |
for | |
map |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
foreach | 300.0 Ops/sec |
for | 155.0 Ops/sec |
map | 265.7 Ops/sec |
Benchmark Explanation
The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares the performance of three different approaches for iterating over an array:
forEach
method to iterate over the array, where each element is processed by calling the provided callback function.for
loop to iterate over the array, where the index of each element is accessed and used to call the someFn
function.map()
method to create a new array with the results of applying the someFn
function to each element in the original array.Options Compared
The three approaches are compared in terms of their performance, measured by the number of executions per second on a specific device and browser configuration.
Pros and Cons of Each Approach
Library and Special JS Features
In this benchmark, no libraries are used beyond the standard JavaScript features. However, it does utilize modern JavaScript syntax, including:
=>
): concise way to define small functions.\r\n
) for multiline strings.Alternative Approaches
Other approaches that could be considered for iteration over arrays include:
forEach()
method, which may provide similar performance characteristics to the current implementation.array indices
or array slicing
to access elements directly, which may provide optimal performance but requires manual management of the indexing.Note that the choice of approach ultimately depends on the specific use case and requirements of the application, as well as personal coding preferences.