Benchmark: Compare appendChild after createElement, vs appendChild after getElementById (version: 4) (version: 1)

HTML Preparation code:

<section id="container"></section>

AخA
 
<section id="container"></section>

Tests:

appendChild to fragment, then append after getElementById (with cloneNode)
let fragment = document.createDocumentFragment(); let elem = document.createElement("div"); for (let i = 0; i < 100; i++) { fragment.appendChild(elem); elem = elem.cloneNode(); } let container = document.getElementById("container"); container.appendChild(elem)
x

let fragment = document.createDocumentFragment();
let elem = document.createElement("div");

for (let i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
fragment.appendChild(elem);
elem = elem.cloneNode();
}

let container = document.getElementById("container");
container.appendChild(elem)
appendChild to fragment, then append after createElement (with cloneNode)
let fragment = document.createDocumentFragment(); let elem = document.createElement("div"); for (let i = 0; i < 100; i++) { fragment.appendChild(elem); elem = elem.cloneNode(); } let container = document.createElement("section"); container.appendChild(elem)
let fragment = document.createDocumentFragment();
let elem = document.createElement("div");

for (let i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
fragment.appendChild(elem);
elem = elem.cloneNode();
}

let container = document.createElement("section");
container.appendChild(elem)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

Test case name	Result
appendChild to fragment, then append after getElementById (with cloneNode)
appendChild to fragment, then append after createElement (with cloneNode)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/91.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 91 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
appendChild to fragment, then append after getElementById (with cloneNode)	16487.8 Ops/sec
appendChild to fragment, then append after createElement (with cloneNode)	14868.2 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

Let's dive into the benchmark and explore what's being tested.

Benchmark Overview

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for appending HTML elements to a document:

Appending to an empty document.createElement("div") fragment after creating the element using document.createElement.
Appending to an empty document.createElement("section") container after creating the element using document.createElement.

Options Compared

The benchmark is testing two options:

Append to a fragment created using document.createDocumentFragment() before appending to an element.
- Pros: This approach allows for efficient creation of a fragment, which can be reused multiple times. It also avoids the need to clone nodes, reducing overhead.
- Cons: This approach may not be as intuitive or straightforward as simply appending to an empty container.
Append directly to an element created using document.createElement() before appending to another element.
- Pros: This approach is more straightforward and easy to understand. It also allows for simple cloning of elements.
- Cons: This approach may incur higher overhead due to the need to create and manage multiple nodes.

Library and Purpose

The benchmark uses two built-in JavaScript libraries:

document.createDocumentFragment(): Creates an empty document fragment that can be used as a container for elements. The purpose is to optimize appending to fragments, reducing the number of DOM mutations.
document.createElement(): Creates a new HTML element. In this case, it's used to create two separate containers (a div and a section) for appending elements.

Special JS Features or Syntax

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases.

Other Alternatives

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are some options:

Using a library like jQuery's $() function to create elements and manipulate the DOM.
Utilizing a DOM manipulation library like React or Angular.
Implementing custom node cloning and appending techniques.
Experimenting with different DOM mutation strategies, such as batch appending or using requestAnimationFrame() for animations.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional complexity, dependencies, or performance overhead compared to the built-in JavaScript libraries used in this benchmark.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the benchmark and explore what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for appending HTML elements to a document:

1. Appending to an empty `document.createElement("div")` fragment after creating the element using `document.createElement`.
2. Appending to an empty `document.createElement("section")` container after creating the element using `document.createElement`.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is testing two options:

* Append to a `fragment` created using `document.createDocumentFragment()` before appending to an element.
	+ **Pros**: This approach allows for efficient creation of a fragment, which can be reused multiple times. It also avoids the need to clone nodes, reducing overhead.
	+ **Cons**: This approach may not be as intuitive or straightforward as simply appending to an empty container.
* Append directly to an `element` created using `document.createElement()` before appending to another element.
	+ **Pros**: This approach is more straightforward and easy to understand. It also allows for simple cloning of elements.
	+ **Cons**: This approach may incur higher overhead due to the need to create and manage multiple nodes.

**Library and Purpose**

The benchmark uses two built-in JavaScript libraries:

* `document.createDocumentFragment()`: Creates an empty document fragment that can be used as a container for elements. The purpose is to optimize appending to fragments, reducing the number of DOM mutations.
* `document.createElement()`: Creates a new HTML element. In this case, it's used to create two separate containers (a `div` and a `section`) for appending elements.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are some options:

* Using a library like jQuery's `$()` function to create elements and manipulate the DOM.
* Utilizing a DOM manipulation library like React or Angular.
* Implementing custom node cloning and appending techniques.
* Experimenting with different DOM mutation strategies, such as batch appending or using `requestAnimationFrame()` for animations.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional complexity, dependencies, or performance overhead compared to the built-in JavaScript libraries used in this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Compare appendChild after createElement, vs appendChild after getElementById (version: 4) (version: 1) (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: appendChild to fragment, then append after getElementById (with cloneNode) vs appendChild to fragment, then append after createElement (with cloneNode)

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

appendChild to fragment, then append after getElementById (with cloneNode)

appendChild to fragment, then append after createElement (with cloneNode)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):