Benchmark: for of vs forEach with add operation

Script Preparation code:

var arr = new Array(1000);

Tests:

for of
var sum1 = 0; for(const a of arr) { sum1 += 1; }
forEach
var sum2 = 0; arr.forEach((a) => { sum2 += 1; })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for of
forEach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into explaining the benchmark and its components.

**What is tested:**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches for iterating over an array:

1. `for of` loop
2. `forEach` method (which is an iteration method in JavaScript)

Both approaches are used to incrementally add 1 to each element in a predefined array of size 1000 and accumulate the result in a variable (`sum1` or `sum2`).

**Options compared:**

Two main options are being compared:

A) **For of loop**: Uses a `for...of` loop, which is a built-in JavaScript syntax for iterating over iterable objects (like arrays). It's concise and readable.

B) **ForEach method**: Uses the `forEach` method, which is an iteration method provided by the Array prototype. It's also concise but might be less readable than the `for...of` loop.

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **For of loop**:
	* Pros:
		+ More readable due to its natural syntax.
		+ No need to define an iterator function or callback.
	* Cons:
		+ Might have performance implications if not optimized correctly (e.g., using a `for...of` loop with a long iterable).
2. **ForEach method**:
	* Pros:
		+ Can be more concise and expressive for certain use cases.
		+ Often preferred in functional programming contexts.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires defining an iterator function or callback, which can make the code less readable.

**Library usage:**

None of the provided benchmark test cases explicitly uses any external libraries. However, the `forEach` method is part of the Array prototype, which is a built-in JavaScript feature.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

The `for...of` loop and `forEach` method are both standard features in modern JavaScript. No special syntax or features are being tested here.

**Other alternatives:**

Alternative iteration methods that could be used instead of `for...of` and `forEach` include:

* Loops (e.g., traditional `for` loops)
* `reduce()` method
* `map()`, `filter()`, or other array methods

For this specific benchmark, the focus is on comparing `for...of` and `forEach`, making these two alternatives less relevant.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/108.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/108.0.1462.46

Browser/OS: Chrome 108 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for of	616357.1 Ops/sec
forEach	439457.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for of vs forEach with add operation (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for of vs forEach

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for of

forEach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):