Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #21316
| From | Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| Subject | Re: loop through an arry |
| Date | 2013-09-13 04:27 +0200 |
| Organization | albasani.net |
| Message-ID | <l0tt67$ge1$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink) |
| References | <l0tb6o$8a5$1@dont-email.me> <b7567773-4470-4827-b2a2-3e1057c303fe@googlegroups.com> <2406331.xsRxLlKTau@PointedEars.de> |
On 2013-09-13 03:17, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > What matters is the unnecessary repeated property access when the property > value does not change. As a result, the “book alternative” (which IIRC were > suggested here almost a decade ago, perhaps even by me) is considerably > faster. Caveats about changing array lengths during the course of a loop aside, what matters most is the implementation. Practically all modern JS engines contain optimizations for the uncached alternative. In some rare cases, they even test faster when array.length is (supposedly) checked on each iteration. There are hundreds of tests about this on jsperf.com, if you're curious. But we cannot be sure that the client engine - or the host object we're iterating over - is sufficiently optimized in all cases. Caching the array length in a variable doesn't hurt (performance or readability), so I usually go for the "book alternative", too. If the expected length of the array is lower than, say, 100, it hardly matters anyway. Use whatever style suits you. - stefan
Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
loop through an arry "Tony Johansson" <johansson.andersson@telia.com> - 2013-09-12 23:19 +0200
Re: loop through an arry Adrián Espinosa <mortuuslordofdeads@gmail.com> - 2013-09-12 14:30 -0700
Re: loop through an arry Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-13 03:17 +0200
Re: loop through an arry Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2013-09-13 04:27 +0200
Re: loop through an arry Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-13 05:23 +0200
Re: loop through an arry Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2013-09-13 05:36 +0200
Re: loop through an arry "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2013-09-13 09:48 +0200
Re: loop through an arry Ken <usenet-so@abdiassoftware.com> - 2013-09-12 16:35 -0500
Re: loop through an arry Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-09-12 16:39 -0700
Re: loop through an arry Ken <usenet-so@abdiassoftware.com> - 2013-09-12 19:45 -0500
Re: loop through an arry Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-09-13 11:18 -0700
Re: loop through an arry Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-14 01:49 +0200
Re: loop through an arry Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-09-13 17:06 -0700
csiph-web