Mixing
javascript : blocked scope inside loop , performance difference
I've a following code snippets ,
poupulateData(data) {
//lets assume variable data is an array of objects with more 400 data
let arr = ;
let obj;
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
obj= data[i];
arr.push(obj.features);
}
}
}
I've declared variable obj outside loop , and in the following code snippets i'm going to declare obj inside the loop , like this
poupulateData(data) {
//lets assume variable data is an array of objects with more 400 data
let arr = ;
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
let obj= data[i];
arr.push(obj.features);
}
}
}
the memory allocation for variable obj will be released after the end of the loop , so i want to know which is best in terms of memory allocation and performance if the collection is big
javascript
asked Nov 22 '18 at 8:18
AhammadaliPKAhammadaliPK
1,10821125
add a comment |
I've a following code snippets ,
poupulateData(data) {
//lets assume variable data is an array of objects with more 400 data
let arr = ;
let obj;
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
obj= data[i];
arr.push(obj.features);
}
}
}
I've declared variable obj outside loop , and in the following code snippets i'm going to declare obj inside the loop , like this
poupulateData(data) {
//lets assume variable data is an array of objects with more 400 data
let arr = ;
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
let obj= data[i];
arr.push(obj.features);
}
}
}
the memory allocation for variable obj will be released after the end of the loop , so i want to know which is best in terms of memory allocation and performance if the collection is big
javascript
asked Nov 22 '18 at 8:18
AhammadaliPKAhammadaliPK
1,10821125
3
Test it at jsperf and why not simplelet arr = data.map(x => x.features)
– Satpal
Nov 22 '18 at 8:23
The variable should be allocated on the stack (if you don't use closures inside the loop scope) anyway, so it would not make any difference. The performance difference will be absolutely negligible, you should focus on writing clean and correct code.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:57
yeah ,thanks much!
– AhammadaliPK
Nov 22 '18 at 13:11
add a comment |
I've a following code snippets ,
poupulateData(data) {
//lets assume variable data is an array of objects with more 400 data
let arr = ;
let obj;
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
obj= data[i];
arr.push(obj.features);
}
}
}
I've declared variable obj outside loop , and in the following code snippets i'm going to declare obj inside the loop , like this
poupulateData(data) {
//lets assume variable data is an array of objects with more 400 data
let arr = ;
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
let obj= data[i];
arr.push(obj.features);
}
}
}
the memory allocation for variable obj will be released after the end of the loop , so i want to know which is best in terms of memory allocation and performance if the collection is big
javascript
asked Nov 22 '18 at 8:18
AhammadaliPKAhammadaliPK
1,10821125
I've a following code snippets ,
poupulateData(data) {
//lets assume variable data is an array of objects with more 400 data
let arr = ;
let obj;
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
obj= data[i];
arr.push(obj.features);
}
}
}
I've declared variable obj outside loop , and in the following code snippets i'm going to declare obj inside the loop , like this
poupulateData(data) {
//lets assume variable data is an array of objects with more 400 data
let arr = ;
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
let obj= data[i];
arr.push(obj.features);
}
}
}
the memory allocation for variable obj will be released after the end of the loop , so i want to know which is best in terms of memory allocation and performance if the collection is big
javascript
javascript
asked Nov 22 '18 at 8:18
AhammadaliPKAhammadaliPK
1,10821125
asked Nov 22 '18 at 8:18
AhammadaliPKAhammadaliPK
1,10821125
asked Nov 22 '18 at 8:18
AhammadaliPKAhammadaliPK
1,10821125
asked Nov 22 '18 at 8:18
AhammadaliPKAhammadaliPK
1,10821125
asked Nov 22 '18 at 8:18
AhammadaliPKAhammadaliPK
1,10821125
1,10821125
3
Test it at jsperf and why not simplelet arr = data.map(x => x.features)
– Satpal
Nov 22 '18 at 8:23
The variable should be allocated on the stack (if you don't use closures inside the loop scope) anyway, so it would not make any difference. The performance difference will be absolutely negligible, you should focus on writing clean and correct code.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:57
yeah ,thanks much!
– AhammadaliPK
Nov 22 '18 at 13:11
add a comment |
3
Test it at jsperf and why not simplelet arr = data.map(x => x.features)
– Satpal
Nov 22 '18 at 8:23
The variable should be allocated on the stack (if you don't use closures inside the loop scope) anyway, so it would not make any difference. The performance difference will be absolutely negligible, you should focus on writing clean and correct code.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:57
yeah ,thanks much!
– AhammadaliPK
Nov 22 '18 at 13:11
3
3
Test it at jsperf and why not simple
let arr = data.map(x => x.features)– Satpal
Nov 22 '18 at 8:23
Test it at jsperf and why not simple
let arr = data.map(x => x.features)– Satpal
Nov 22 '18 at 8:23
The variable should be allocated on the stack (if you don't use closures inside the loop scope) anyway, so it would not make any difference. The performance difference will be absolutely negligible, you should focus on writing clean and correct code.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:57
The variable should be allocated on the stack (if you don't use closures inside the loop scope) anyway, so it would not make any difference. The performance difference will be absolutely negligible, you should focus on writing clean and correct code.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:57
yeah ,thanks much!
– AhammadaliPK
Nov 22 '18 at 13:11
yeah ,thanks much!
– AhammadaliPK
Nov 22 '18 at 13:11
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Variable declared within a loop will be declared every cycle, thus allocating extra memory. Also the variable is not immediately cleaned after a cycle. You can tell the garbage collector to run after each cycle by setting obj = null which will decrease your memory footprint, but will cost you some CPU time. Also keep in mind that you don't have direct control over the garbage collector. A JavaScript engine optimizes your code before running it and if there is enough free memory on your system it will most likely free memory when the CPU is not busy.
In general declaring variables outside a loop and cleaning them after is better for performance. Here is an example:
poupulateData(data) {
let arr = new Array(data.length); // set the size to save some memory
let obj = {}; //set it to object to avoid casting it when the loop starts
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
obj = data[i];
arr[i] = obj.features;
}
}
obj = null //clean some memory
i = null
}
Usually you don't need to care about this stuff in JavaScript. A pretty decent optimization is done before your code is being executed.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:33
Nedko DimitrovNedko Dimitrov
523615
2
"You can tell the garbage collector to run" - no, clearing a variable does not automatically run the gargabe collector. Sure, it does mark the value as eligible for collection (assuming it's not referenced from elsewhere), but the GC decides itself when it will actually start collecting.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:54
@Bergi probably I did not express myself correctly I tried to point exactly that. I wrote "... tell the GC..." not "will force it to do it". And the JS engine optimization may not respect your request . If you want help me to edit the answer to make it more clear.
– Nedko Dimitrov
Nov 22 '18 at 11:02
add a comment |
If you are after performance, in general when dealing with arrays it is advised to use the array methods provided, because they are optimised to work with arrays.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:19
squeekyDavesqueekyDave
415216
The array methods are just as well optimised as explicit looping, there's no difference in performance. (But sure, usingmaphere would be cleaner)
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:58
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53426539%2fjavascript-blocked-scope-inside-loop-performance-difference%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Variable declared within a loop will be declared every cycle, thus allocating extra memory. Also the variable is not immediately cleaned after a cycle. You can tell the garbage collector to run after each cycle by setting obj = null which will decrease your memory footprint, but will cost you some CPU time. Also keep in mind that you don't have direct control over the garbage collector. A JavaScript engine optimizes your code before running it and if there is enough free memory on your system it will most likely free memory when the CPU is not busy.
In general declaring variables outside a loop and cleaning them after is better for performance. Here is an example:
poupulateData(data) {
let arr = new Array(data.length); // set the size to save some memory
let obj = {}; //set it to object to avoid casting it when the loop starts
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
obj = data[i];
arr[i] = obj.features;
}
}
obj = null //clean some memory
i = null
}
Usually you don't need to care about this stuff in JavaScript. A pretty decent optimization is done before your code is being executed.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:33
Nedko DimitrovNedko Dimitrov
523615
2
"You can tell the garbage collector to run" - no, clearing a variable does not automatically run the gargabe collector. Sure, it does mark the value as eligible for collection (assuming it's not referenced from elsewhere), but the GC decides itself when it will actually start collecting.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:54
@Bergi probably I did not express myself correctly I tried to point exactly that. I wrote "... tell the GC..." not "will force it to do it". And the JS engine optimization may not respect your request . If you want help me to edit the answer to make it more clear.
– Nedko Dimitrov
Nov 22 '18 at 11:02
add a comment |
Variable declared within a loop will be declared every cycle, thus allocating extra memory. Also the variable is not immediately cleaned after a cycle. You can tell the garbage collector to run after each cycle by setting obj = null which will decrease your memory footprint, but will cost you some CPU time. Also keep in mind that you don't have direct control over the garbage collector. A JavaScript engine optimizes your code before running it and if there is enough free memory on your system it will most likely free memory when the CPU is not busy.
In general declaring variables outside a loop and cleaning them after is better for performance. Here is an example:
poupulateData(data) {
let arr = new Array(data.length); // set the size to save some memory
let obj = {}; //set it to object to avoid casting it when the loop starts
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
obj = data[i];
arr[i] = obj.features;
}
}
obj = null //clean some memory
i = null
}
Usually you don't need to care about this stuff in JavaScript. A pretty decent optimization is done before your code is being executed.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:33
Nedko DimitrovNedko Dimitrov
523615
2
"You can tell the garbage collector to run" - no, clearing a variable does not automatically run the gargabe collector. Sure, it does mark the value as eligible for collection (assuming it's not referenced from elsewhere), but the GC decides itself when it will actually start collecting.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:54
@Bergi probably I did not express myself correctly I tried to point exactly that. I wrote "... tell the GC..." not "will force it to do it". And the JS engine optimization may not respect your request . If you want help me to edit the answer to make it more clear.
– Nedko Dimitrov
Nov 22 '18 at 11:02
add a comment |
Variable declared within a loop will be declared every cycle, thus allocating extra memory. Also the variable is not immediately cleaned after a cycle. You can tell the garbage collector to run after each cycle by setting obj = null which will decrease your memory footprint, but will cost you some CPU time. Also keep in mind that you don't have direct control over the garbage collector. A JavaScript engine optimizes your code before running it and if there is enough free memory on your system it will most likely free memory when the CPU is not busy.
In general declaring variables outside a loop and cleaning them after is better for performance. Here is an example:
poupulateData(data) {
let arr = new Array(data.length); // set the size to save some memory
let obj = {}; //set it to object to avoid casting it when the loop starts
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
obj = data[i];
arr[i] = obj.features;
}
}
obj = null //clean some memory
i = null
}
Usually you don't need to care about this stuff in JavaScript. A pretty decent optimization is done before your code is being executed.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:33
Nedko DimitrovNedko Dimitrov
523615
Variable declared within a loop will be declared every cycle, thus allocating extra memory. Also the variable is not immediately cleaned after a cycle. You can tell the garbage collector to run after each cycle by setting obj = null which will decrease your memory footprint, but will cost you some CPU time. Also keep in mind that you don't have direct control over the garbage collector. A JavaScript engine optimizes your code before running it and if there is enough free memory on your system it will most likely free memory when the CPU is not busy.
In general declaring variables outside a loop and cleaning them after is better for performance. Here is an example:
poupulateData(data) {
let arr = new Array(data.length); // set the size to save some memory
let obj = {}; //set it to object to avoid casting it when the loop starts
if (data && data.length) {
for (let i = 0; i < data.length; i++) {
obj = data[i];
arr[i] = obj.features;
}
}
obj = null //clean some memory
i = null
}
Usually you don't need to care about this stuff in JavaScript. A pretty decent optimization is done before your code is being executed.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:33
Nedko DimitrovNedko Dimitrov
523615
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:33
Nedko DimitrovNedko Dimitrov
523615
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:33
Nedko DimitrovNedko Dimitrov
523615
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:33
Nedko DimitrovNedko Dimitrov
523615
523615
2
"You can tell the garbage collector to run" - no, clearing a variable does not automatically run the gargabe collector. Sure, it does mark the value as eligible for collection (assuming it's not referenced from elsewhere), but the GC decides itself when it will actually start collecting.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:54
@Bergi probably I did not express myself correctly I tried to point exactly that. I wrote "... tell the GC..." not "will force it to do it". And the JS engine optimization may not respect your request . If you want help me to edit the answer to make it more clear.
– Nedko Dimitrov
Nov 22 '18 at 11:02
add a comment |
2
"You can tell the garbage collector to run" - no, clearing a variable does not automatically run the gargabe collector. Sure, it does mark the value as eligible for collection (assuming it's not referenced from elsewhere), but the GC decides itself when it will actually start collecting.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:54
@Bergi probably I did not express myself correctly I tried to point exactly that. I wrote "... tell the GC..." not "will force it to do it". And the JS engine optimization may not respect your request . If you want help me to edit the answer to make it more clear.
– Nedko Dimitrov
Nov 22 '18 at 11:02
2
2
"You can tell the garbage collector to run" - no, clearing a variable does not automatically run the gargabe collector. Sure, it does mark the value as eligible for collection (assuming it's not referenced from elsewhere), but the GC decides itself when it will actually start collecting.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:54
"You can tell the garbage collector to run" - no, clearing a variable does not automatically run the gargabe collector. Sure, it does mark the value as eligible for collection (assuming it's not referenced from elsewhere), but the GC decides itself when it will actually start collecting.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:54
@Bergi probably I did not express myself correctly I tried to point exactly that. I wrote "... tell the GC..." not "will force it to do it". And the JS engine optimization may not respect your request . If you want help me to edit the answer to make it more clear.
– Nedko Dimitrov
Nov 22 '18 at 11:02
@Bergi probably I did not express myself correctly I tried to point exactly that. I wrote "... tell the GC..." not "will force it to do it". And the JS engine optimization may not respect your request . If you want help me to edit the answer to make it more clear.
– Nedko Dimitrov
Nov 22 '18 at 11:02
add a comment |
If you are after performance, in general when dealing with arrays it is advised to use the array methods provided, because they are optimised to work with arrays.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:19
squeekyDavesqueekyDave
415216
The array methods are just as well optimised as explicit looping, there's no difference in performance. (But sure, usingmaphere would be cleaner)
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:58
add a comment |
If you are after performance, in general when dealing with arrays it is advised to use the array methods provided, because they are optimised to work with arrays.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:19
squeekyDavesqueekyDave
415216
The array methods are just as well optimised as explicit looping, there's no difference in performance. (But sure, usingmaphere would be cleaner)
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:58
add a comment |
If you are after performance, in general when dealing with arrays it is advised to use the array methods provided, because they are optimised to work with arrays.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:19
squeekyDavesqueekyDave
415216
If you are after performance, in general when dealing with arrays it is advised to use the array methods provided, because they are optimised to work with arrays.
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:19
squeekyDavesqueekyDave
415216
edited Nov 22 '18 at 13:42
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:19
squeekyDavesqueekyDave
415216
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:19
squeekyDavesqueekyDave
415216
answered Nov 22 '18 at 9:19
squeekyDavesqueekyDave
415216
415216
The array methods are just as well optimised as explicit looping, there's no difference in performance. (But sure, usingmaphere would be cleaner)
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:58
add a comment |
The array methods are just as well optimised as explicit looping, there's no difference in performance. (But sure, usingmaphere would be cleaner)
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:58
The array methods are just as well optimised as explicit looping, there's no difference in performance. (But sure, using
map here would be cleaner)– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:58
The array methods are just as well optimised as explicit looping, there's no difference in performance. (But sure, using
map here would be cleaner)– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:58
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53426539%2fjavascript-blocked-scope-inside-loop-performance-difference%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
Test it at jsperf and why not simple
let arr = data.map(x => x.features)– Satpal
Nov 22 '18 at 8:23
The variable should be allocated on the stack (if you don't use closures inside the loop scope) anyway, so it would not make any difference. The performance difference will be absolutely negligible, you should focus on writing clean and correct code.
– Bergi
Nov 22 '18 at 10:57
yeah ,thanks much!
– AhammadaliPK
Nov 22 '18 at 13:11