Benchmark: xCare Forms Selector

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.10.2/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div id="#test-root"><div name="test-child"></div></div>

Tests:

Context Selector
jQuery('[name=test-child]', '#test-root').css('border', '1px solid red');
Find
jQuery('#test-root').find('[name=test-child]').css('border', '1px solid red');
Name Selector
jQuery('[name=test-child]').css('border', '1px solid red');
Context Object Selector
jQuery('[name=test-child]', jQuery('#test-root')).css('border', '1px solid red');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Context Selector
Find
Name Selector
Context Object Selector

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll provide a detailed explanation of the benchmark test cases and their comparisons.

**Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case named "xCare Forms Selector" that tests four different approaches for selecting elements in an HTML document: `context`, `find`, `name selector`, and `context object`.

**Test Cases**

There are four individual test cases:

1. **Context Selector**
	* Benchmark Definition: `jQuery('[name=test-child]', '#test-root').css('border', '1px solid red');`
	* This test case uses the `context` method, which searches for an element by its context (the parent element). In this case, it's searching within the `#test-root` element.
2. **Find**
	* Benchmark Definition: `jQuery('#test-root').find('[name=test-child]').css('border', '1px solid red');`
	* This test case uses the `find` method, which searches for an element by its child elements. In this case, it's searching within the descendants of the `#test-root` element.
3. **Name Selector**
	* Benchmark Definition: `jQuery('[name=test-child]').css('border', '1px solid red');`
	* This test case uses the `name selector`, which searches for an element by its `name` attribute. In this case, it's searching for an element with the `name` attribute set to `"test-child"`.
4. **Context Object Selector**
	* Benchmark Definition: `jQuery('[name=test-child]', jQuery('#test-root')).css('border', '1px solid red');`
	* This test case uses the `context object selector`, which searches for an element by its context (the parent element) and then selects the first child element that matches the selector.

**Comparison**

The four test cases are compared in terms of their execution speed, measured as executions per second. The results show that:

* The **Find** method is the fastest, followed closely by the `context` and `context object selector` methods.
* The **Name Selector** method is slower than the others.

**Library**

The benchmark test case uses jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling. In this case, it's used to perform the element selection and CSS styling operations.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Context**: Pros:
	* Fastest among the four methods.
	* Works well when the context is known (e.g., searching within a specific parent element).
Cons:
	* May not work well when the context is unknown or changing.
2. **Find**: Pros:
	* Fast and efficient, as it only searches through child elements.
	* Suitable for cases where you need to search within descendants of an element.
Cons:
	* May perform slower than `context` or `context object selector` if the descendant tree is deep.
3. **Name Selector**: Pros:
	* Simple and easy to use.
	* Works well when you know the exact attribute value (e.g., searching for elements with a specific `name` attribute).
Cons:
	* May perform slower than other methods, especially when dealing with large datasets or complex selectors.
4. **Context Object Selector**: Pros:
	* Combines the benefits of `context` and `find` methods.
	* Suitable for cases where you need to search within child elements while still using a context (e.g., searching within descendants of a parent element).
Cons:
	* May perform slower than other methods due to the additional complexity.

**Alternatives:**

1. **CSS Selectors**: Instead of using JavaScript libraries like jQuery, you can use CSS selectors to select elements based on their attributes, class names, or IDs.
2. **Native Browser APIs**: Some modern browsers provide native APIs for DOM manipulation and selection, such as `document.querySelector()` and `document.querySelectorAll()`. These APIs may offer better performance than jQuery-based solutions.

In summary, the choice of method depends on your specific use case, dataset size, and performance requirements. Understanding the pros and cons of each approach will help you make an informed decision when selecting a method for your JavaScript benchmarking needs.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/99.0.4844.74 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 99 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Context Selector	1034571.3 Ops/sec
Find	1180201.2 Ops/sec
Name Selector	85347.7 Ops/sec
Context Object Selector	783397.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

xCare Forms Selector (version: 3)

testing .find vs context vs name selector vs context object

Comparing performance of: Context Selector vs Find vs Name Selector vs Context Object Selector

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Context Selector

Find

Name Selector

Context Object Selector

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):