- From: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 18:19:11 +0000
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
> But maybe I misunderstand the performance cost you're worrying about?
Well, I'm not sure, so let me restate it just in case.
Let's say I pass a sequence containing 1000 numbers to such a function. Your proposed behavior is, from what I understand,
```js
function frobEachElement(sequence) {
var array = [];
for (var el of sequence) {
array.push(Number(el));
}
array.forEach(frob);
}
```
So you do a total of 2000 iterations. Whereas the "idiomatic" way would be
```js
function frobEachElement(sequence) {
for (var el of sequence) {
frob(Number(el));
}
}
```
which only does 1000 iterations.
Thoughts?
Received on Monday, 18 November 2013 18:20:01 UTC