Benchmark: HTML data attribute: reading and writing via JQuery and JS dataset, string and numeric with/without parse

HTML data attribute: reading and writing via JQuery and JS dataset, string and numeric with/without parse (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JS: write text vs JQuery: write text vs JS: write int vs JQuery: write int vs JS: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing vs JQuery: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing vs JS: increment (r+w) int with parsing

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="data" data-txt="text" data-int="0">div element containing data- fields</div>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>

Tests:

JS: write text
window.onload = function() { document.getElementById("data").dataset.txt = "newtext"; }
JQuery: write text
window.onload = function() { $("#data").data("txt") = "newtext"; }
JS: write int
window.onload = function() { document.getElementById("data").dataset.int = ""+42; }
JQuery: write int
window.onload = function() { $("#data").data("int") = 42; }
JS: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing
window.onload = function() { document.getElementById("data").dataset.int = document.getElementById("data").dataset.int + 10; }
JQuery: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing
window.onload = function() { $("#data").data("int") = $("#data").data("int") + 10; }
JS: increment (r+w) int with parsing
window.onload = function() { document.getElementById("data").dataset.int = ""+(Number.parseInt(document.getElementById("data").dataset.int) + 1); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JS: write text
JQuery: write text
JS: write int
JQuery: write int
JS: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing
JQuery: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing
JS: increment (r+w) int with parsing

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/114.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 114 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JS: write text	1912033.1 Ops/sec
JQuery: write text	1913336.4 Ops/sec
JS: write int	1933515.9 Ops/sec
JQuery: write int	1979427.8 Ops/sec
JS: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing	1938204.0 Ops/sec
JQuery: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing	2050809.8 Ops/sec
JS: increment (r+w) int with parsing	1966267.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark tests reading and writing of HTML data attributes using two approaches: JavaScript (JS) and jQuery. The test cases cover various scenarios:

1. Writing a string value
2. Writing an integer value without parsing
3. Writing an integer value with parsing

**Options being compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of:

* JS (JavaScript): writing and incrementing data attributes using native JavaScript syntax.
* JQuery: writing and incrementing data attributes using jQuery's `data()` method.

**Pros and Cons**

### JS (JavaScript)

Pros:

1. Native performance: Writing and incrementing data attributes without relying on an external library.
2. Lightweight: No additional overhead from the jQuery library.

Cons:

1. More verbose: Requires manual handling of data attribute values, which can lead to more code.
2. Parsing required: When writing integer values, parsing is necessary, which can introduce extra overhead.

### JQuery

Pros:

1. Concise syntax: Using `data()` method makes code more concise and readable.
2. No parsing required: Incrementing integer values is done automatically by jQuery's caching mechanism.

Cons:

1. Additional library overhead: jQuery introduces an extra layer of complexity and performance overhead.
2. More complex: Understanding the nuances of jQuery's data attribute handling can be challenging.

**Library: jQuery**

jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation, event handling, and Ajax interactions. In this benchmark, jQuery's `data()` method is used to read and write HTML data attributes. The caching mechanism implemented by jQuery automatically updates the value when writing, eliminating the need for explicit parsing when incrementing integer values.

**Special JS feature: Template literals**

In one of the test cases (`JS: write int`), a template literal (`"\""+42`) is used to create a string containing an integer value. This feature allows for more readable and efficient string concatenation in JavaScript.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives could include:

* Using `data()` method with `JSON.stringify()` and `JSON.parse()` for parsing integer values.
* Implementing custom data attribute handling using native JavaScript or other libraries like Lodash.
* Comparing performance of different caching mechanisms, such as jQuery's caching mechanism versus manual caching.

However, these alternatives are not part of the original benchmark, and their implementation would require significant changes to the test cases.

Related benchmarks:

HTML data attribute: reading and writing via JQuery and JS dataset, string and numeric with/without parse (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JS: write text vs JQuery: write text vs JS: write int vs JQuery: write int vs JS: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing vs JQuery: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing vs JS: increment (r+w) int with parsing

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JS: write text

JQuery: write text

JS: write int

JQuery: write int

JS: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing

JQuery: increment (r+w) int w/o parsing

JS: increment (r+w) int with parsing

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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