Is it worth caching the length of an array in a Javascript loop?

JavaScript performance comparison

Revision 107 of this test case created by ChuyAMS

Info

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5349425/whats-the-best-to-loop-an-array-in-javascript

Preparation code

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1/jquery.min.js">
</script>
<script>
  var myArray = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20];
</script>

Preparation code output

Test runner

Warning! For accurate results, please disable Firebug before running the tests. (Why?)

Java applet disabled.

Testing in unknown unknown
Test Ops/sec
With caching
 
for (var i = 0, len = myArray.length; i < len; i++) {
  var e = myArray[i];
  e++;
}
 pending…
Without caching
 
for (var i = 0; i < myArray.length; i++) {
  var e = myArray[i];
  e++;
}
 pending…
Counting down
 
for (var i = myArray.length; i--;) {
  var e = myArray[i];
  e++;
}
 pending…
caching length outside for loop
 
len = myArray.length;

for (var i = 0; i < len; i++) {
  var e = myArray[i];
  e++;
}
 pending…
while loop
 
len = myArray.length;
while (len--) {
  var e = myArray[len];
  e++;
}
 pending…
for check index
 
for (var i = 0; myArray[i++];) {
  var e = myArray[i];
  e++;
}
 pending…
For in
 
for (var i in myArray) {
  var e = myArray[i];
  e++;
}
 pending…
forEach Array Function
 
myArray.forEach(function(i, e) {
  e++;
});
 pending…
jQuery each function
 
$.each(myArray, function(i, e) {
  e++;
});
 pending…

Compare results of other browsers

Revisions

You can edit these tests or add even more tests to this page by appending /edit to the URL. Here’s a list of current revisions for this page:

0 comments

Add a comment