Benchmark: for vs lodash foreach

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.10/lodash.min.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++; });

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

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test that compares different approaches for iterating over an array in JavaScript. The test consists of four individual test cases:

1. **Classic `for` loop**: This is a traditional, explicit loop using a variable `i` to iterate from 0 to 9999.
2. **Lodash `forEach` with `range` function**: This uses the Lodash library's `range` function to generate an array of numbers from 0 to 9999, and then applies the `forEach` method to iterate over it.
3. **Array iteration using `forEach`**: This directly iterates over an array created using `Array(10000)`, leveraging the built-in `forEach` method.
4. **Lodash `forEach` with both `range` and `Array` functions**: Similar to the previous point, but uses Lodash's `forEach` function with both `range` and `Array` functions.

**Options compared:**

* The main difference between these approaches is the use of external libraries (Lodash) versus native JavaScript built-in methods.
* Another variation is the explicit iteration using a `for` loop (classic approach) vs. implicit iteration using `forEach` or array creation.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Classic `for` loop**:
	+ Pros: straightforward, easy to understand, minimal dependencies.
	+ Cons: may be slower due to the overhead of explicit variable management and loop control.
* **Lodash `forEach` with `range` function**:
	+ Pros: leverages a robust library for iteration, can handle complex iterations more easily.
	+ Cons: introduces additional dependency on Lodash, which might add overhead due to library initialization.
* **Array iteration using `forEach`**:
	+ Pros: efficient and concise, leverages native JavaScript built-in methods.
	+ Cons: assumes the array is already created, may not handle edge cases (e.g., empty arrays).
* **Lodash `forEach` with both `range` and `Array` functions**:
	+ Pros: similar to the previous point, but combines two library functions for a more complex iteration pattern.
	+ Cons: identical pros and cons as the previous points.

**Library usage:**

The Lodash library is used in three out of four test cases. The main purpose of Lodash here is to provide a convenient way to generate arrays (using `range`) or iterate over existing arrays using `forEach`.

**Special JavaScript features:**

None of the provided benchmark definitions explicitly use special JavaScript features like async/await, Promises, or ES modules. However, if we consider the usage of external libraries like Lodash, it might be argued that these introduce additional complexities due to dependencies and initialization overhead.

In summary, this benchmark test allows users to compare different approaches for iterating over arrays in JavaScript. The main differences lie in the use of native built-in methods versus external library functions (Lodash). Understanding the pros and cons of each approach can help developers optimize their code for specific performance requirements or use cases.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/75.0.3770.100 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 75 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for	200523.4 Ops/sec
lodash range foreach	11230.0 Ops/sec
array foreach	35356.7 Ops/sec
array lodash foreach	4421.1 Ops/sec
lodash range lodash foreach	4289.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

for vs lodash foreach (version: 0)

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

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for

lodash range foreach

array foreach

array lodash foreach

lodash range lodash foreach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):