Benchmark: jQuery 3.6 parent() vs closest() speed performance comparison

HTML Preparation code:

<ul>
	<li class="current">1</li>
	<li>2</li>
	<li>3</li>	   
</ul>

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.0/jquery.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

item = $('.current');

Tests:

Parent
console.log(item.parent());
Closest
console.log(item.closest('ul'));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Parent
Closest

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/110.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 110 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Parent	165070.6 Ops/sec
Closest	157697.2 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 benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark compares the performance of two jQuery methods: `parent()` and `closest()`. The `parent()` method returns the parent element in the DOM tree, while `closest()` searches for an ancestor element that matches a given selector or string.

**Script Preparation Code:**
```javascript
item = $('.current');
```
This code initializes a variable `item` by selecting all elements with class `current` using jQuery's `$()` function. This sets up the context for the test cases.

**Html Preparation Code:**
```html
<ul>
    <li class="current">1</li>
    <li>2</li>
    <li>3</li>
</ul>
```
This HTML code creates a simple unordered list with three items, one of which has class `current`. This structure is used to test the performance of `parent()` and `closest()` on this specific DOM tree.

**Individual Test Cases:**

There are two test cases:

1. **Parent**:
```javascript
console.log(item.parent());
```
This code logs the parent element of the `item` variable to the console using the `parent()` method.

2. **Closest**:
```javascript
console.log(item.closest('ul'));
```
This code searches for an ancestor element that is a direct child of the `<ul>` element and returns its selector string using the `closest()` method.

**Library:**

The benchmark uses jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling. In this case, the `parent()` and `closest()` methods are used to interact with the DOM tree.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing the performance of two specific jQuery methods.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches:**

The two approaches being compared have different characteristics:

* `parent()`: Returns the direct parent element, which may not always be what you expect (e.g., if there are other elements between the current element and its parent).
* `closest()`: Searches for an ancestor element that matches a given selector or string, which can be more flexible but also slower due to the search.

Pros of `parent()`:

* Faster execution time
* Less computation required

Cons of `parent()`:

* May not return the expected result in all cases
* Limited flexibility

Pros of `closest()`:

* More flexible and forgiving than `parent()`
* Can find ancestors that match specific selectors or strings

Cons of `closest()`:

* Slower execution time
* Requires more computation to search for matching elements

**Other Alternatives:**

If you were to implement this benchmark yourself, you could consider the following alternatives:

* Use other DOM manipulation libraries like React or Angular, which also provide similar methods for navigating the DOM tree.
* Implement a custom solution using plain JavaScript, without relying on jQuery's DOM traversal methods.
* Add additional test cases that cover different scenarios, such as testing the performance of these methods on more complex DOM trees or with different selectors.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would likely require significant modifications to the benchmark code and may not provide comparable results.

Related benchmarks:

jQuery 3.6 parent() vs closest() speed performance comparison (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Parent vs Closest

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Parent

Closest

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):