Benchmark: queryS - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<div id=''><a id='' href='#' /></div>

Tests:

indirect
document.getElementsByTagName("div")[0].firstChild;
direct
document.querySelector("div a")

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
indirect
direct

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.182 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
indirect	1259120.8 Ops/sec
direct	1110777.6 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing two different ways to select elements in an HTML document using JavaScript: indirect and direct methods.

The indirect method uses `document.getElementsByTagName()` to get a list of all `<div>` elements, and then accesses the first child element (`firstChild`) of the selected `<div>`. The direct method uses `document.querySelector()` to directly select the element that matches the CSS selector `"div a"`.

**Options compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Indirect method**: This approach is more explicit and requires more code, but it can be useful when you need to handle multiple elements or want to add additional logic before accessing the first child element.
2. **Direct method**: This approach is concise and efficient, as it directly accesses the desired element without requiring a loop or additional processing.

**Pros and Cons**

**Indirect Method:**

Pros:

* More explicit and understandable code
* Allows for additional logic before accessing the element

Cons:

* Requires more code and iterations to get to the first child element
* May be slower due to the extra steps

**Direct Method:**

Pros:

* Concise and efficient code
* Directly accesses the desired element without extra iterations

Cons:

* Less explicit and may require additional knowledge of CSS selectors
* May not be as easily understandable by others

**Library usage**

In this benchmark, there is no library being used explicitly. However, it's worth noting that `document` is a global object in JavaScript, which provides access to the DOM (Document Object Model).

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript constructs and syntax.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to write similar benchmarks for other aspects of JavaScript performance, here are some alternative approaches you could consider:

1. **Using `querySelectorAll()`**: This method is similar to the direct method but returns an array of all elements that match the CSS selector.
2. **Using a library like Lodash or Ramda**: These libraries provide functions that can help simplify and optimize JavaScript code, such as `_.first()` or `R.head()`.
3. **Comparing different optimization techniques**: You could compare the performance of different optimization techniques, such as using caching, memoization, or lazy loading.

Keep in mind that the specific approach you take will depend on the goals and requirements of your benchmark, as well as the features and capabilities of JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

queryS (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: indirect vs direct

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

indirect

direct

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):