<div id="test">test</div>
var element = document.getElementById('test');
element.clientHeight;
window.getComputedStyle(element).height;
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
clientHeight | |
getComputedStyle |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
clientHeight | 1152326.9 Ops/sec |
getComputedStyle | 489691.0 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the provided JSON benchmark definition and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.
What's being tested:
The benchmark measures two ways to get the height of an HTML element:
element.clientHeight
: This method returns the client height of the element directly from the JavaScript object itself.window.getComputedStyle(element).height
: This method uses the Web APIs to get the computed style of the element and then extracts its height value.Options compared:
The two options being compared are:
element.clientHeight
to get the client height directly from the JavaScript object.window.getComputedStyle(element).height
to get the computed style of the element and then extracting its height value.Pros and Cons:
Library:
The getComputedStyle
method uses the Web APIs, which are a set of standardized APIs for accessing and manipulating web page content. The Web APIs provide a way to get information about an element's computed style, layout, and other properties.
Special JS feature or syntax:
There isn't any special JavaScript feature or syntax being used in this benchmark. It solely relies on standard JavaScript methods and the Web APIs.
Other alternatives:
If you wanted to compare these options with alternative approaches, you could also consider:
getBoundingClientRect()
: This method returns the bounding rectangle of an element, which includes its width, height, left, top, and other properties.Keep in mind that each of these alternatives would introduce additional complexity and potential overhead, making the benchmark less relevant to measuring performance differences between clientHeight
and getComputedStyle
.