Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #21335
| Message-ID | <1553168.V9fml2jhPD@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Date | 2013-09-14 01:49 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: loop through an arry |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| References | <l0tb6o$8a5$1@dont-email.me> <l0tc62$3pr$1@speranza.aioe.org> <GgsYt.30492$VU.28941@fx05.iad> <l0tnar$rnh$1@speranza.aioe.org> <PFIYt.44777$dJ2.1784@fx30.iad> |
Daniel Pitts wrote:
> On 9/12/13 5:45 PM, Ken wrote:
>> On 12.09.2013 18:39, Daniel Pitts wrote:
>>> On 9/12/13 2:35 PM, Ken wrote:
>>>> need to squeeze out all you can of the browser (which in case you would
>>>> use a *while* loop in any case) there is no real problem using your
>>>> approach.
>>> while and for loops should be identical in performance. They are merely
>>> different syntax for the same operations.
>>
>> Well.. it do depend on browser and implementation (such as JIT) but in
>> general while loops are faster as seen here (with most browsers):
>>
>> http://jsperf.com/fastest-array-loops-in-javascript/32
>>
>> Disclaimer: I didn't make the test.
>
> So many of those tests are flawed. They don't even perform the same
> operation!
ACK.
> Anyway, for my browser, the fastest one was a test I created using a for
> loop:
>
> for (var l = arr.length; l--;) {
> someFn(arr[l]);
> }
I expected this; I have recommended this approach before (where reverse
order is acceptable). Those are, after all, the fewest operations.
> The second fastest one was a loop that was already there using a while
> loop:
>
> var l = arr.length;
> while(l--) {
> someFn(arr[l]);
> }
>
> The difference in speed was close to the margin-of-error, so they are
> practically equivalent.
That is because they are compiled to the same bytecode or native code.
In pseudo-bytecode:
-------------------------------------------
line # operation return operands
-------------------------------------------
1 0 DECL_VAR $0 "l"
1 FETCH_VAR $1 "arr"
2 FETCH_OBJ_R $2 $1, "length"
3 ASSIGN $3 $0, $2
2 4 FETCH_VAR $4 $0
5 JMPZ $4, ->13
6 POST_DEC $6 $0
3 7 FETCH_VAR $7 $1
8 FETCH_VAR $8 $0
9 FETCH_OBJ_R $9 $7, $8
10 FETCH_VAR $10 "someFn"
11 CALL_FUNC $11 $10, $9
12 JMP ->4
13 RETURN 0
-------------------------------------------
The “for” statement only differ from the “while” statement in that the
operations #0 to #6 are produced by the same line.
> Testing in Chrome 29.0.1547.65 on OS X 10.8.4
Thanks.
--
PointedEars
Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
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