Benchmark: for vs for..of - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var array = new Array(100);
var array2 = [];

Tests:

for
for (var i = 0; i < array.length; i++) { array2.push(array[i]); }
for ... of
for (var i of array) { array2.push(i); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
for ... of

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two different loop constructs in JavaScript: `for` loops and `for...of` loops.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Traditional `for` loops**: The first option uses a traditional `for` loop with an incrementing variable (`i`) to iterate over the array elements.
2. **`for...of` loops**: The second option uses a `for...of` loop, which is a newer syntax that allows iterating directly over arrays and other iterable objects without manual indexing.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Traditional `for` loops**:
	+ Pros: Well-established, widely supported, and easy to understand.
	+ Cons: Can be less efficient due to the need for manual indexing and incrementing.
* **`for...of` loops**:
	+ Pros: More concise, readable, and potentially faster (as shown in the benchmark results).
	+ Cons: May not work as expected in certain edge cases or when working with non-iterable objects.

**Library**

In this case, there is no explicitly mentioned library being used. However, it's worth noting that `for...of` loops rely on the ES6 specification for their implementation.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The benchmark uses a newer syntax (`for...of` loops) and takes advantage of the latest JavaScript features.

**Benchmark Preparation Code and HTML Preparation Code**

The provided script preparation code creates two arrays: `array` with 100 elements, and `array2`, which is an empty array. The HTML preparation code is null, indicating that no additional HTML-related setup is required for this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to these loop constructs include:

1. **While loops**: While loops can be used in place of `for` loops, they require more manual effort and indexing.
2. **Array.prototype.forEach()**: The `forEach()` method can be used as an alternative to both traditional `for` loops and `for...of` loops, but it may not provide the same performance benefits.

In summary, the benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two loop constructs in JavaScript: traditional `for` loops and `for...of` loops. The results suggest that `for...of` loops may be faster than traditional `for` loops, making them a more attractive choice for efficient array iteration.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/114.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 114 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for	7012.4 Ops/sec
for ... of	26574.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for vs for..of (version: 0)

Compare loop performance

Comparing performance of: for vs for ... of

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for

for ... of

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):