Benchmark: for loop vs forEach vs while

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];
var i = 0;

while (i <= 1E5) arr[i] = i++;

Tests:

for loop
for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) { console.log(arr[i]) }
forEach
arr.forEach(console.log)
while
let i = 0 while (i < arr.length) { console.log(arr[i]) i++ }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for loop
forEach
while

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 benchmark compares the performance of three different approaches to iterate over an array: `for` loop, `forEach`, and `while` loop.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is identical for all three test cases:

```javascript
var arr = [];
var i = 0;

while (i <= 1E5) arr[i] = i++;
```

This code creates an array `arr` with a length of 100,000 and initializes its elements with consecutive integers from 0 to 99,999.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is an object that specifies the test cases:

```json
[
    {
        "Benchmark Definition": "for (let i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {\r\n  console.log(arr[i])\r\n}",
        "Test Name": "for loop"
    },
    {
        "Benchmark Definition": "arr.forEach(console.log)",
        "Test Name": "forEach"
    },
    {
        "Benchmark Definition": "let i = 0\r\n\r\nwhile (i < arr.length) {\r\n  console.log(arr[i])\r\n  i++\r\n}",
        "Test Name": "while"
    }
]
```

The three test cases are:

1. `for` loop
2. `forEach`
3. `while` loop

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of each approach to iterate over the array.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **For Loop**
	* Pros:
		+ Can be used with arrays and objects.
		+ Allows for more control over the iteration process (e.g., incrementing an index variable).
	* Cons:
		+ May require manual indexing, which can lead to errors.
		+ May not be as efficient as other approaches for very large datasets.
2. **ForEach**
	* Pros:
		+ Simplifies iteration and reduces boilerplate code.
		+ More concise than traditional `for` loops.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower due to the overhead of function calls.
		+ Limited control over the iteration process.
3. **While Loop**
	* Pros:
		+ Provides more control over the iteration process (e.g., incrementing an index variable).
		+ May be faster than `for` loops for very large datasets.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires manual indexing, which can lead to errors.
		+ Can be less readable than other approaches.

**Library Used**

None of the test cases use a library specifically. However, it's worth noting that some browsers and JavaScript engines may provide additional optimizations or features for arrays and loops (e.g., `for...of` loops).

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None of the test cases explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax.

**Other Considerations**

* Performance: The benchmark measures the execution speed of each approach. However, other factors like memory usage, cache hits, and branch prediction may also impact performance.
* Readability: While readability is not explicitly measured in this benchmark, it's essential to consider code maintainability, conciseness, and understandability when choosing an iteration approach.

**Alternatives**

For large datasets or performance-critical applications:

* `for...of` loops (in modern browsers and JavaScript engines)
* `map()`, `filter()`, and other array methods optimized for parallel processing
* Iterators and generators

For more complex data structures, such as objects with nested arrays or matrices:

* Recursive functions or specialized libraries for data manipulation
* WebAssembly or native code optimizations for performance-critical applications

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/122.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 122 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for loop	2.3 Ops/sec
forEach	2.6 Ops/sec
while	2.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for loop vs forEach vs while (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for loop vs forEach vs while

Created: 8 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for loop

forEach

while

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):