<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div id="foo">Hello World</div>
var d = "<p>test</p>";
$('#foo').text(d)
document.getElementById('foo').textContent =d;
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
jquery text | |
js innerHtml |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
jquery text | 2730921.5 Ops/sec |
js innerHtml | 5489693.5 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.
What's being tested?
The two test cases are comparing the performance of two approaches to get the text content of an HTML element: using jQuery's text()
method versus directly accessing the textContent
property on the DOM element.
Options compared
text()
method: This method sets the text content of an element and returns the current value.textContent
property: This property returns the text content of an element without modifying it.Pros and Cons
text()
method:textContent
property:Library and its purpose
In this case, jQuery is being used for its convenience and ease of use. The text()
method provides a simple way to set and get text content, which can be beneficial in many scenarios.
Special JS feature or syntax
There isn't any special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested here. Both approaches are standard DOM manipulation techniques.
Other alternatives
If you wanted to test other approaches, some possible alternatives could include:
innerHTML
property (although this is generally discouraged due to security concerns)For the provided benchmark, the two test cases are designed to compare the performance of jQuery's text()
method versus directly accessing the textContent
property. By measuring the execution time of each approach, the benchmark aims to determine which one is faster and more efficient.
The latest benchmark result shows that, for this specific use case, using jQuery's text()
method yields a slightly better performance compared to directly accessing the textContent
property on the DOM element.