Benchmark: parent vs closest 555

HTML Preparation code:

<span class="span">
    <div id='it'>
    </div>
</span>

Script Preparation code:

var it = document.getElementById("it");

function closestParent(element, className) {
    if (element.classList.contains(className)) return element;
    if (!element.parentNode) return null;
    if (element.parentNode.classList.contains(className)) return element.parentElement;
    return null;
  }

Tests:

parentElement
while (it !== null && it.className.indexOf("span") === -1) { it = it.parentElement; }
closest tag
it.closest('span')
closest class
it.closest('.span')
closest tag class
it.closest('span.span')
parentNode
while (it.className.indexOf("span") === -1) { it = it.parentNode; if(it === document) { it = null break } }
closestParentNode
closestParent(it, 'span');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
parentElement
closest tag
closest class
closest tag class
parentNode
closestParentNode

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/108.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 OPR/94.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Opera 94 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
parentElement	6941339.5 Ops/sec
closest tag	8579541.0 Ops/sec
closest class	8248857.5 Ops/sec
closest tag class	7423772.5 Ops/sec
parentNode	11305824.0 Ops/sec
closestParentNode	6537260.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring JavaScript performance is crucial for ensuring efficient and scalable applications.

The provided JSON benchmark definition represents two core aspects of the `closest` method:

1.  **Parental Search Approach:**

*   The script preparation code includes an implementation for finding the closest parent element that matches a specified class name using a recursive approach (`closestParent(element, className)`).
    *   This function starts by checking if the current element contains the target class and returns it immediately.
    *   If not, it proceeds to check the parent node's classes. If any of them match, the method returns the parent element itself; otherwise, it recursively calls itself on the next parent node until no more suitable parents are found or the document root is reached.

2.  **Direct Approach:**

*   The html preparation code includes a simple `span` element (`<span class="span">...</span>`) that will be used to test different methods.
    *   Each individual benchmark case defines its unique approach:

*   **Parent Node Search (parentElement):** Iteratively navigates through the DOM, stopping at the first parent node without a 'span' class until it reaches the document root or finds an element with a 'span' class. It stops at the document when it no longer has any other children.

*   **Closest Tag Search (closest tag):** Utilizes the built-in `closest` method of an HTML element, which returns the first ancestor that matches the specified tag name.

*   **Closest Class Search (closest class):** Builds upon the concept of `closest tag`, but seeks out ancestors with a matching class. It checks both exact and class-like matching.

*   **Closest Tag Class Search (closest tag class):** Similar to the closest class search, it targets elements that match both tags and classes simultaneously, enhancing its precision for finding suitable parents while searching through ancestor nodes.

Options compared:

*   Parental Search Approach vs Direct Approach:
    *   Pros of Parental Search Approach: It leverages the inherent structure of HTML documents by navigating upwards from an element. This might offer better performance in scenarios where elements are deeply nested or have a specific order.
    *   Cons of Parental Search Approach: As it traverses upwards, it requires handling the case where no matching parent is found, which could result in unnecessary computations and potential stack overflows for very deep DOMs.
*   Iterative vs Recursive Approach:
    *   Pros of Iterative Approach (parentElement): Stays within a specified execution limit as it only looks at immediate children or ancestors until stopping criteria are met, avoiding possible overflow risks.

**Library:**

None is explicitly mentioned in the provided JSON. However, JavaScript's `closest` method can be used to find an ancestor with a matching tag name or class, implying that this implementation might rely on inherent browser functionality or libraries that provide similar methods for DOM traversal and selection.

**Special JS Features/Syntax:**

- The use of `document.getElementById`, `element.classList.contains`, and the `=== -1` comparison is standard JavaScript practice.
- The implementation utilizes regular expressions (`className.indexOf`) to check for class matches, which are a common feature in modern browsers.

Alternatives:

*   For a more robust approach that could potentially match different browsers or environments with varying DOM implementations, consider using the following alternatives:
    *   **QuerySelector:** A standard HTML5 API (implemented in modern browsers) for selecting elements based on CSS selectors. It provides flexibility in matching tags and classes while offering better performance compared to string-based comparisons.
    *   **CSS Selectors API:** Provides a more efficient and standardized method for matching elements through their class names, attributes, and pseudo-classes/pseudo-elements.

These alternatives can enhance the accuracy and performance of your JavaScript benchmarks by leveraging native browser capabilities.

Related benchmarks:

parent vs closest 555 (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: parentElement vs closest tag vs closest class vs closest tag class vs parentNode vs closestParentNode

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

parentElement

closest tag

closest class

closest tag class

parentNode

closestParentNode

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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