Benchmark: TestTestTest - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

function testA(){
	var div = document.createElement('div');
	div.innerText = 'Hello world';

	return div;
}

function testB(){
	var tmp = document.createElement('div');
  var html = '<div>Hello world</div>';
  
  tmp.innerHTML = html;
  
	return tmp.firstChild;
}

var testCData = testA();
function testC(){
	return testCData.cloneNode(true);
}

​x
 
function testA(){    var div = document.createElement('div');    div.innerText = 'Hello world';​    return div;}​function testB(){    var tmp = document.createElement('div');  var html = '<div>Hello world</div>';    tmp.innerHTML = html;      return tmp.firstChild;}​var testCData = testA();function testC(){    return testCData.cloneNode(true);}

Tests:

A
testA();
testA();
B
testB();
testB();
C
testC();
testC();

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
A
B
C

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/60.0.3112.113 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 60 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
A	820908.6 Ops/sec
B	166861.1 Ops/sec
C	1133336.8 Ops/sec

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

Let's break down the benchmark and its options.

Benchmark Overview

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark, specifically designed to compare the performance of three different approaches: creating an HTML element directly (Test A), using the innerHTML property to create the content (Test B), and cloning a node with cloneNode(true) method (Test C).

Options Compared

Creating an HTML Element Directly: In Test A, an HTML element is created using the document.createElement() method and its innerText property is set.
Using innerHTML Property: In Test B, an HTML string is used to create a temporary string with the desired content, which is then assigned to the innerHTML property of another element (tmp). The resulting first child of this new element is returned.
Cloning a Node: In Test C, a cloned node is created by calling the cloneNode(true) method on the result of Test A.

Pros and Cons

Creating an HTML Element Directly (Test A):
- Pros: More control over the element's properties and behavior.
- Cons: May lead to performance overhead due to additional steps in the DOM tree.
Using innerHTML Property (Test B):
- Pros: Simpler and more concise code, but may introduce security risks if the HTML string is not sanitized.
- Cons: Less control over element properties and behavior.
Cloning a Node (Test C):
- Pros: More efficient than creating an entirely new element, as it only copies the necessary parts of the original node.
- Cons: May lead to unexpected side effects if not used carefully.

Library Usage

The cloneNode method is a part of the DOM API and does not require any specific library. It's a built-in JavaScript function that creates a deep copy of an existing node.

Special JS Feature or Syntax

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes explicitly mentioned in this benchmark, aside from the use of innerHTML, which can be considered as using some internal functionality, but its usage is not particularly unique for the scope of this benchmark.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its options.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark, specifically designed to compare the performance of three different approaches: creating an HTML element directly (Test A), using the `innerHTML` property to create the content (Test B), and cloning a node with `cloneNode(true)` method (Test C).

**Options Compared**

1. **Creating an HTML Element Directly**: In Test A, an HTML element is created using the `document.createElement()` method and its `innerText` property is set.
2. **Using `innerHTML` Property**: In Test B, an HTML string is used to create a temporary string with the desired content, which is then assigned to the `innerHTML` property of another element (`tmp`). The resulting first child of this new element is returned.
3. **Cloning a Node**: In Test C, a cloned node is created by calling the `cloneNode(true)` method on the result of Test A.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **Creating an HTML Element Directly (Test A)**:
    *   Pros: More control over the element's properties and behavior.
    *   Cons: May lead to performance overhead due to additional steps in the DOM tree.
*   **Using `innerHTML` Property (Test B)**:
    *   Pros: Simpler and more concise code, but may introduce security risks if the HTML string is not sanitized.
    *   Cons: Less control over element properties and behavior.
*   **Cloning a Node (Test C)**:
    *   Pros: More efficient than creating an entirely new element, as it only copies the necessary parts of the original node.
    *   Cons: May lead to unexpected side effects if not used carefully.

**Library Usage**

The `cloneNode` method is a part of the DOM API and does not require any specific library. It's a built-in JavaScript function that creates a deep copy of an existing node.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes explicitly mentioned in this benchmark, aside from the use of `innerHTML`, which can be considered as using some internal functionality, but its usage is not particularly unique for the scope of this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

TestTestTest (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: A vs B vs C

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

A

B

C

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):