Benchmark: for vs forEach (working)

Script Preparation code:

var testArray = [];

for (var i = 1; i <= 10000; i++) {
   testArray.push(i);
}

Tests:

for loop
for(var i = 0, length = testArray.length; i < length; i += 1) { console.log(testArray[i]); }
forEach
testArray.forEach((item) => { console.log(item); });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for loop
forEach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested and analyzed here.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two different methods for iterating over an array: `for` loops and `forEach()` method.

**Individual Test Cases**

We have two test cases:

1. **"for loop"**: This test case uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over an array, logging each item to the console.
2. **"forEach"**: This test case uses the `forEach()` method to iterate over an array, which is a more modern and concise way of iterating over arrays.

**Library**

In this case, no external libraries are being used besides built-in JavaScript features.

**JS Feature or Syntax Used**

The only specific JavaScript feature used here is the `forEach()` method, which is a part of the Array prototype in JavaScript. It's a convenient way to execute a function on each element of an array without having to manually iterate over it using a traditional `for` loop.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of using `for` loops vs `forEach()`:

* **For Loops**:
	+ More control over iteration (e.g., you can easily skip or stop iterations)
	+ Can be more efficient in certain situations, especially when working with large datasets
	+ Traditionally used in JavaScript programming
* **ForEach() Method**:
	+ Concise and easier to read, especially for simple iteration scenarios
	+ Automatic memory management (no need to worry about incrementing indices or handling indices manually)
	+ Can be slightly less efficient than traditional `for` loops due to the overhead of function calls

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to consider when iterating over arrays include:

* **Map()** and **Reduce()**: These methods are similar to `forEach()` but return a new array with transformed values or aggregated results.
* **For...of Loop**: A newer, more concise way to iterate over iterables (like arrays) using a traditional `for` loop syntax.

These alternatives offer varying levels of performance, conciseness, and control over iteration. The choice ultimately depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/69.0.3464.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 69 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for loop	11.5 Ops/sec
forEach	10.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for vs forEach (working) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for loop vs forEach

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for loop

forEach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated 28 days ago):