map vs. for loop

Andrew Crites
16 min readJul 22, 2018


I almost never use for loops in JavaScript and many other languages anymore. Instead, when iterating over collections I tend to use the map operator when it’s available. This applies to arrays which have a .map method as well as Observables which have a map operator and things such as lodash’s map function which allows for iteration over a broader set of collections including unordered collections such as Objects.

Note: in this article I’ll occasionally use map as a shorthand for many iteration operators. My article is primarily geared towards JavaScript, but I think the concepts do apply more universally.

I actually can’t think of the last time I found myself needing to use a for loop for anything. I can usually replace it with another operator. I also typically teach newer developers about iteration operators such as map and eschew for and other such looping constructs sometimes entirely even though they were / are a bread-and-butter of programming. for loops are one of the first things that many developers learn.

So why use map?

One of the most difficult questions I get when teaching is why we use constructs such as .map over for loops. I don’t think that I have a great answer. Even searching online for “for loop vs. map” and the like, I can’t find anything really concrete. It is interesting to me that all the top results I find for this search are related to JavaScript even though this could certainly apply to other programming languages that have a map and similar constructs as well. It also seems to be pretty contentious to some people.

I decided to write this article because I’m not fully satisfied with what I found out there talking about constructs such as map vs. for loops. I’m hoping this provides more clarity to some people with the question — especially developers who are more familiar with for than with map.

I won’t try to say that one is strictly better than the other. I personally prefer using collection iteration operators such as map over language looping constructs, and I will continue to teach this paradigm. I’ll discuss the reasons for my preference, and try to list the concrete benefits of using map. I think that most people I work with — once they understand the iteration syntax — prefer it over loops. However, this is more preference and working in a standard than a clear-cut victory for one or the other. I don’t think such a thing will ever exist. I also have to admit that I have a personal preference for the map syntax which does have some influence over my choice.

For the sake of simplicity, I’ll stick to working with Arrays for the rest of this article even though the concepts I talk about can be applied to many other collection data structures more generally.

What are Arrays?

I always keep my wife in mind when I write these articles. She is not a programmer, but I think she has an ancillary understanding of programming concepts what with being forced to live with me. Thus, I’ll start with the basics even though most developers and even many laypeople will already understand this.

An array is an ordered list — in fact this construct is called a List in some programming languages. Arrays contain data in a set order. For example, [1, 2, 3] is a list of three numbers. You could also have [2, 3, 1], or ['andrew', 'james', 'crites'] or any other list of data that you could think of. You can think of it as a column (or possibly a row) in a spreadsheet.

We need to manipulate the data stored in arrays all the time. A very common way to do this is to take one array and generate a new array with new data. For example, if we take the array of names above, maybe we want to capitalize all of them and then display them back to a user, properly capitalized. This involves taking each item or element of the array and running a capitalization function against it. It will become ['Andrew', 'James', 'Crites'].

We could write a simple program that runs the capitalization function on each element of the array…

names = ['andrew', 'james', 'crites']

Arrays are typically 0-indexed. That means that the first element (also called the zeroth element) is accessed by 0 rather than 1. We can also access array elements by an index stored in a variable, like

x = 1
print names[x] // 'james'

Arrays are indexed by the whole numbers (counting numbers starting with 0), in order.

How the for loop works

Arrays can be of arbitrary length. All of the array examples above have three items in there. They have a length of 3. However, arrays can be of essentially any size from 0 (empty) to millions of items or more. For example, if we have an array of a person’s names such as ['andrew', 'james', 'crites'] it’s certainly plausible that they would have two, four, or some other number of names like ['santiago', 'juan', 'mendez', 'menendez'] or ['john', 'smith'].

Our program from above won’t work right for these other two arrays since it won’t capitalize 'menendez', and some undefined behavior might happen when we try to access the missing element, names[2] of the John Smith array.

We also have to repeat ourselves quite a lot in our program by writing capitalize over and over again. This will be difficult to update later if our requirements change and we want to use a different function instead — maybe uppercase or something. It’s also more error prone since we might mistype as capitaliz once we get bored of typing it over-and-over again.

All of these issues can be solved by constructs that move through an array regardless of its length. The for loop is one of the most basic of these and is often taught to developers very early on. What the for loop does is run the code inside of the loop over and over until some condition is met (or more accurately only while some condition is met).

x = 0;
for x < names.length:
x = x + 1

This is usually written as for (x = 0; x < names.length; x++).

Now our program will work on an array of any length, and we have the added benefit of only having our capitalize function called in one spot. If we needed to update our logic to do something different or more complicated, we would only have to update it one time.

If you were to read the suggested program in colloquial English, I might suggest:

  • For x starting at 0…
  • As long as x is less than the length of the names array…
  • Capitalize the xth element of the names array…
  • Then add one to x

The for loop above does ad-hoc iteration. We are moving through each element of the array, but we have to define the condition ourselves. We could have put x <= names.length, or x < names.length + 1, or maybe even x >= 0 which would make our program run forever — that would be a big problem. We could also change how we update x, perhaps with x = x + 2.

I posit that this is not true iteration because we can write for loops in a way that it does not move through every element of the array in order.

True Iteration with map

Some languages allow you to perform true iteration using the for keyword, such as for (element: array). This will make element each element of the array in order inside of the for loop block. I won’t discuss this iteration construct in this article — it’s more like forEach I mention later. Languages may also call map something else or have some other way of writing it.

Enter the map construct. This function takes another function, runs that function on every element of the array, and returns a new array: => capitalize(name))

We could also simply write this as

It may look weird to people who are unfamiliar, but that function we give to map is run on each element. We can unravel it and it will be identical to our first implementation:


In the same way that the code inside of our for loop is called as long as the condition is true, the code inside of map() is called one time for each element in the array.

This does the same thing as our for loop, but the big difference is that the conditions for iteration are handled for us. We’re guaranteed to get every element of the array in the right order. We don’t have to manage our own index variable or condition for that variable.

Map also provides the benefit of immutability. When we run map, it creates a new array and leaves our original array alone (assuming we don’t update the original array inside our function). This has benefits of not updating our data unexpectedly and allowing us to use our original array later on for some other purpose if we need it:

capitalizedNames =

We can write our for loop in a way that does not update our original array too, but this requires proper management of a new array:

capitalizedNames = []
for x = 0; x < names.length; x++
capitalizedNames[x] = capitalize(names[x]))

As with our earlier for loop this has the potential to be error-prone in some way. We also have to initialize capitalizedNames in the proper place and to an empty array rather than simply initializing it as the result that we want.

Benefits of map over for loops

This is a list of the benefits of using map as I see them:

  • True iteration — you know that your code is going to run on each element of the array in the right order.
  • Immutability — if written properly, your original array will be unaffected. This has potential benefits in cases where the original array is still needed elsewhere. for loops can of course also be written so as not to update the original array, but it requires more code and updating our new array as part of our loop operation. map keeps this cleaner since you only have to work in one scope to still maintain immutability:
  • Scope isolation and Reusability — often the function inside map only needs to work within its own scope, i.e. against the elements inside the array themselves. It doesn’t require any variables outside of its scope. A for loop may require this (such as declaring capitalizeNames outside the loop and also using it in the loop). This reduces the chances of making a mistake by updating something inappropriately in the wrong scope. This also makes it easier to extract the operation we use in map for clarity / isolation / reuse.
  • Cleaner code — I think less code is strictly better as long as the original meaning isn’t lost. When doing identical things, map can almost always be written with less code than for. It can be cleanly written on one line sometimes whereas for requires at least two — generally three with braces included. Finally, the array element you are working with for map automatically gets a name. You would have to assign this to a variable when using for if you wanted it. name is clearer than names[x]. Scope isolation and a reduction in the amount of variables you need alongside reduced size all make code objectively cleaner. It’s arguable whether the meaning of map vs. for is lost on some people, but I think the next point helps:
  • Specificity — this applies to iteration operators generally rather than just map. Each has a specific purpose. map calls a function for each element of the array and returns a new array. reduce calls a function for each element of the array and keeps the results in an accumulator whose ultimate value is returned. filter takes an array and returns a new array whose values have met some condition against the original array. Each operator has a specific purpose that is easier to reason about. for loops can be used more generally, and you have to inspect the code to determine how it’s being used in a specific case.
  • Composability — it is much easier to compose iteration operations together. For example, you could do map(map(map)) (not that you should need to), or more realistically reduce(filter(map)) . If you wanted to do something similar for for loops, you would have to manage a separate array and iteration process for all three operations and their results.

I think the composability benefit merits an example. Let’s say we have an array of strings that we want to convert to numbers, and then and we want to get the sum of all the even numbers in the array. We can simply do:

.reduce((sum, number) => sum + number)

If we run this on ['1', '2', '3', '4', '5'] we will get 6, i.e. 2 + 4.

With for loops, we have to do this:

numbers = []
for (x = 0; x < strings.length; x++)
numbers[x] = toNumber(strings[x])
evenNumbers = []
for (y = 0; y < numbers.length; y++)
i = 0
if (isEven(numbers[y]))
evenNumbers[i] = numbers[y]
// you wouldn't need i here if you used `.push` of course
sum = 0
for (z = 0; z < evenNumbers.length; z++)
sum = sum + evenNumbers[z]

This is more code, it’s more difficult to reason about, there is more nesting, and it’s more error-prone — particularly in the spot where we have to manage the index of evenNumbers since we’re creating a new array of a different size. That’s something filter could do for us. We’re also managing quite a few variables here, and it could be pretty easy to get tripped up. We also use arbitrary names for indices such as x. Certainly we could write index here, but with the iteration operators we don’t even need the index at all.

It’s also easier to add more composition using map and other iteration methods in the middle if we need to.

Benefits (?) of the for loop

The for loop has potential benefits, but I don’t think they are as concrete as those offered by map or other iteration operators.

  • Performance — maybe… I ran some unscientific performance tests of for vs. map on 10,000,000-item arrays in Chrome and Safari. map performed strictly worse in Chrome, but better in Safari. However, overall everything completed in 1–3 seconds which I think is still relatively fast for such a massive array. It’s plausible that you will work with such large arrays if you are doing things like processing video contents in-browser. Under these specific circumstances, if you need the benefit of around half a second of performance per-10,000,000 elements in Chrome you might be better off using a for loop for now. However, on other platforms / environments or other circumstances, map might still be faster, and in fact it may be faster in the future. Consider the other benefits of map and do your own testing before choosing for loops purely for performance reasons. Also keep in mind that while a for loop may run faster it might use more memory too.
  • Familiarity — newer developers might not even know what map is, and it can be difficult to grasp at first. I think this is still a non-benefit, though, since it’s important for developers to always learn new concepts and see the benefits and drawbacks of each. I would also recommend that map be taught alongside and perhaps even instead of for nowadays. Perhaps there is some benefit to developers who use for being able to jump into a new code base without unfamiliar constructs, but I don’t think map is that difficult to understand… especially not compared to a lot of the other constructs or libraries you would expect a new developer to have to learn when transitioning platforms and languages. The benefits of familiarity in programming are not to be understated, but I think the solution here is to start teaching map earlier instead. In fact, some programming languages such as Rust don’t even have traditional for loops.
  • Ease of understanding… but probably not — I think that the for loop is so ubiquitous and taught so early on that programmers have a grasp on it for most of their programming lives. This creates a possible illusion that it’s easier to understand. In fact, I think that map specifically may be easier to understand than a for loop in general. for loops for a specific purpose might be easier to understand, but since they can work so generally their meaning is not always clear. I think that map's specific purpose makes it clearer. I do wonder if we taught map first and then talked about for loops to someone who was brand new to programming whether they would find one or the other easier. Regardless, I don’t think that map is a difficult concept to grasp — not more than for anyway. It’s just that for gets hammered home so much. Also, once you understand map it’s easier to understand all of the other iteration operators available. All-in-all, this one is subjective.

Note that the ability to break out of for loops or continue through them isn’t a benefit since it’s obviated by other iteration operators. continue is trivially replaced by return if it’s needed. Operations where you would typically need break such as finding if some or all elements of an array match some condition or finding a specific array element all have iteration replacement methods in JavaScript and other languages, e.g. some, every, find, and perhaps fill… and many more. You might consider also using a tool belt like lodash if you need to do more interesting things or work with other types of collections rather than rewrite logic someone else has already done better.

Non-benefits of map

I often hear the fact that map is “functional programming” as a reason why it’s beneficial. First of all, I can’t say I strictly know what functional programming means. I think it has a meaning similar “object-oriented programming” only its buzzword trap is worse. It seems like if you’re using map or the like in your code you’re doing functional programming in the same way that if you use objects in your code you’re doing object-oriented programming.

Rather than falling back on the functional buzzword as a crutch, I’d rather look at the concrete benefits of map and other iteration functions I extol above.

Another comment I see and agree with is that map is easier to read / looks better / is cooler than using a for loop. This is entirely subjective, though. I think that some people hate map vehemently and find it more difficult to read too. However, I’m sure you can find someone out there who says the same thing about for loops. I do in cases where they end up with some deep nesting. Maybe after accepting the other benefits of map it starts to look cooler. This ties in with the “cleaner code” benefit I listed above, but code cleanliness is more objective than simply liking how syntax looks or thinking it’s easier to read.

What about forEach?

In JavaScript there is an array operator forEach which does the same thing as map except it doesn’t return a new array. I think that forEach is almost like a transition between using for loops and other operators. For example, you could write the even number sum code using forEach instead, and it might look like this:

numbers = []
strings.forEach((string, x) => numbers[x] = toNumber(string))
evenNumbers = []
i = 0
numbers.forEach(number => {
if (isEven(number))
evenNumbers[i] = number
sum = 0
evenNumbers.forEach(number => sum = sum + number)

This is sort of a mixture between the iteration operators and for loops. You get some of the benefits including true iteration and some scope isolation and reduction in code size, but you still don’t get any composability or specificity.

I think that forEach is not needed (except maybe to help with debugging), and, in cases where you find yourself using it, you probably want map, reduce, some, every, find, or filter. In cases where you purely want to update an array element in-place, the benefits of map over forEach weaken… pretty much the only benefits you would get in that case are immutability and composability which you might not need. However, I would probably choose map in that case out of personal preference / dislike of forEach alongside the fact that forEach has no benefit in that case either.

The performance of forEach vs. map is even less clear than of for vs. map, so I can’t say that performance is a benefit for either.

In Conclusion

I hope that this helps answer the question about “why use map over a for loop” to some degree. I think that iteration operators such as map have concrete benefits that the for loop simply doesn’t have. I think that the benefits of the for loop relegate it to specific use-cases related to performance. I ask any infuriated for loop fanatic to think: if you had learned about and were using map consistently first, would you still like for loops better once you learned about them? Another way to phrase the question is: can you think of concrete benefits to the for loop besides familiarity? Imagine that any new developer you work with knows map as well … or maybe even instead of for. Can you list other benefits?

Performance is often cited as a key reason to choose for, but I think some of the arguments for this are spurious. A browser is not the best platform for working with very large data sets. Sometimes you might have to, but I think that the collections you’ll be working with in a browser are typically relatively small. I’ve seen the argument that for will save milli or even micro-seconds. You can add up all of the total amount of time saved for a huge total performance benefit for users. However, the issue here is that there is user down-time to consider. Users do a lot during idle time. The 1 millisecond you gain from using for pales in comparison to the 30 seconds a user will take to read the paragraph — and you can’t get any of that time back. I agree that in some cases there may be obvious performance benefits, but in cases where the benefits are very small you have to weigh the other benefits of map that I listed. Is 1 millisecond per 30 seconds worth sacrificing code size, composability, specificity, reusability, and simpler immutability and iteration? The 1/1000 seconds vs. 30 seconds may be very dramatic, but I don’t think it’s totally unrealistic either. There are other factors that may impact performance a lot more that are worth a look before you drill down to map vs. for.

There is also the argument for consistency among code-bases… if you’re using for in one very tight performance spot you might as well use for everywhere so that you’re consistent. However, I think this goes against the specificity argument. You might need for in one spot for performance reasons, but the implication of using it everywhere is that it serves the same purpose everywhere. In fact, if we think about it I think we’ll all agree that for and map are not pure alternatives to each other… the only thing they share is that they can iterate over collections. Your decision about whether to use map or for to iterate should require more thought than consistency of using the same keyword.

Finally, I’m not trying to discourage anyone from using for. Ultimately if you own a code-base and that’s what you’re more comfortable with, even if it’s for reasons you can’t enumerate, I say go for it. I only ask that you take the time to learn and understand map and see its potential benefits.