<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
				<title>Comments on: JavaScript loops profiled</title>
		<link>http://www.phpdevblog.net/2009/01/javascript-loops-profiled.html</link>
		<description>JavaScript loops profiled Comment Feed</description>
				<language>de</language>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:09:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>mcw[blog] 'Ruby' Alpha 3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>Comment #1 by: slink</title>
			<link>http://www.phpdevblog.net/2009/01/javascript-loops-profiled.html#comment117</link>
			<guid>http://www.phpdevblog.net/2009/01/javascript-loops-profiled.html#comment117</guid>
			<author>slink</author>			
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:00:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[ Since these methods are not equilant, it makes no sense to compare them. Keep in mind that the "for &#8230; in " statement returns all enumerable properties, hence you get the user defined methods of Array, too. The forEach way is nice, but it costs a lot because it has to run "i" times a function. ]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Comment #2 by: Dominik Jungowski</title>
			<link>http://www.phpdevblog.net/2009/01/javascript-loops-profiled.html#comment118</link>
			<guid>http://www.phpdevblog.net/2009/01/javascript-loops-profiled.html#comment118</guid>
			<author>Dominik Jungowski</author>			
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 12:37:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[ Main reason why I did this test, was to test whether forEach would be any useful in my case (iterating over an array of ids), since I just discovered it today :D I could have thought of it myself that it will probably be slower because of the callback, but you never know with JavaScript ;D<br />
<br />
Thanks for the for&#8230; in comment btw, I always wondered why I sometimes have function in there when looping over it ]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
		</channel>
</rss>
