Benchmark: createElement vs cloneNode ㅠ53152 324

Tests:

createElement
var list = [], n = 0; while(true) { n++; list.push(document.createElement('div')); node.setAttribute("class", "test"); node.innerText = "test"; if(n===10000) break; }
cloneNode
var list = [], n = 0, node = document.createElement('div'); node.setAttribute("class", "test"); node.innerText = "test"; while(true) { n++; var clone = node.cloneNode(true); node.setAttribute("class", "clone"); node.innerText = "clone"; list.push(clone); if(n===10000) break; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
createElement
cloneNode

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**What is being tested?**

On MeasureThat.net, users create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks to measure the performance of different approaches in creating or cloning DOM elements.

In this specific benchmark, two test cases are compared:

1. `createElement`
2. `cloneNode`

These test cases aim to determine which approach is faster for creating new DOM elements or cloning existing ones before insertion.

**Options being compared**

The options being compared are:

* **createElement**: Creating a new DOM element using the `document.createElement()` method.
* **cloneNode**: Cloning an existing DOM element using the `node.cloneNode(true)` method.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

* **createElement**
	+ Pros:
		- Faster, as it doesn't require cloning an existing element.
		- More efficient for creating new elements from scratch.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires more DOM overhead, as a new element is created in memory before being inserted into the document.
* **cloneNode**
	+ Pros:
		- Less DOM overhead, as only the node's content is cloned, without creating a new element.
	+ Cons:
		- Can be slower due to cloning an existing element's contents.

**Library and its purpose**

In this benchmark, `node` appears in both test cases. However, it is not explicitly stated which `node` refers to. In the context of DOM manipulation, `node` typically represents a reference to a DOM node (e.g., an HTML element). The `cloneNode()` method clones the contents of the specified node.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark that require specific knowledge or expertise.

**Other alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches, consider the following:

* Using a virtual DOM library like React or Virtual DOM to manage DOM updates.
* Implementing a custom element creation function using a template string or a constructor function.
* Using Web Workers or other parallel processing techniques to optimize DOM-intensive tasks.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional complexity and may not be suitable for all use cases. The `createElement` vs `cloneNode` comparison remains a fundamental benchmark, as it highlights the trade-offs between creating new elements versus cloning existing ones.

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/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 116 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
createElement	0.0 Ops/sec
cloneNode	97.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

createElement vs cloneNode ㅠ53152 324 (version: 0)

Faster way to create new dom elements before insertion

Comparing performance of: createElement vs cloneNode

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

createElement

cloneNode

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):