Benchmark: for loop vs. lodash range foreach 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/2.4.1/lodash.js"></script>

Tests:

for
var x = 0; for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { x++; }
lodash range foreach
var x = 0; _.range(10000).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array foreach
var x = 0; Array(10000).forEach(function (i) { x++; });
array lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(Array(10000), function (i) { x++; });
lodash range lodash foreach
var x = 0; _.forEach(_.range(10000), function (i) { x++; });
lodash times
var x = 0; _.times(10000, function(i){ x++; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for
lodash range foreach
array foreach
array lodash foreach
lodash range lodash foreach
lodash times

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and its various test cases.

**Benchmark Purpose**

The goal of this benchmark is to compare the performance of different approaches for iterating over a large number of elements in JavaScript:

1. Traditional `for` loop
2. Using `lodash.range()` and `.forEach()`
3. Using an array and `.forEach()`
4. Using `lodash.forEach()` with an array generated by `_`
5. Using `lodash.times()`

These test cases aim to measure which approach is the most efficient in terms of execution speed.

**Library Usage**

The benchmark uses the popular JavaScript utility library, Lodash (version 2.4.1). The main functions used from Lodash are:

* `_.range(n)`: Returns an array of numbers starting from 0 up to n-1.
* `_.forEach(array, callback)`: Iterates over each element in the given array and calls the provided callback function.

**Special JavaScript Features**

None of the benchmark's test cases utilize any special JavaScript features such as async/await, generators, or web workers. The focus is on comparing the performance of different iteration methods using standard JavaScript constructs.

**Comparison Options and Their Pros/Cons**

Here's a brief overview of each option:

1. **Traditional `for` loop**:
	* Pros: Simple, well-understood, and works across all browsers.
	* Cons: Can be slower for large datasets due to the need to update the loop counter manually.
2. **Lodash `_.range()` + `.forEach()`**:
	* Pros: Convenient and efficient way to iterate over a large number of elements.
	* Cons: May incur additional overhead from Lodash's library code.
3. **Array iteration with `.forEach()`**:
	* Pros: Simple and widely supported, making it easy to use in different contexts.
	* Cons: May have slower performance compared to `_.range()` due to the need to create an array upfront.
4. **Lodash `_.forEach()` with an array generated by `_`**:
	* Pros: Reduces overhead from creating an array upfront and leverages Lodash's optimized iteration code.
	* Cons: Requires a small amount of extra library code.
5. **Lodash `_.times()`**:
	* Pros: Optimized for iterating over a fixed number of elements, making it suitable for this benchmark.
	* Cons: May be less flexible than other options.

**Other Alternatives**

For comparison purposes, other iteration methods that are not explicitly tested in the benchmark include:

* Using `Set` or `Map` iterators
* Utilizing Web Workers for parallel processing
* Employing async/await with callbacks (although this would introduce additional complexity)

These alternatives might be more suitable for specific use cases but are not relevant to the core performance comparison of the provided test cases.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:61.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/61.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 61 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for	50552.2 Ops/sec
lodash range foreach	4616.0 Ops/sec
array foreach	14360.2 Ops/sec
array lodash foreach	11710.6 Ops/sec
lodash range lodash foreach	4923.6 Ops/sec
lodash times	5505.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for loop vs. lodash range foreach 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: for vs lodash range foreach vs array foreach vs array lodash foreach vs lodash range lodash foreach vs lodash times

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for

lodash range foreach

array foreach

array lodash foreach

lodash range lodash foreach

lodash times

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):