Benchmark: elementFromPoint4

HTML Preparation code:

<style>
    #container {
      width: 1000px;
      height: 1000px;
    }
    #container * {
      display: flex;
      flex: 1 1;
      background: red;
      border: 1px solid black;
      min-width: 0;
      min-height: 0;
      width: 100%;
      height: 100%;
    }
    #container .tick {
      flex-direction: row;
    }
    #container .tock {
      flex-direction: column;
    }
</style>
<div id="container"></div>

Script Preparation code:

const container = document.getElementById("container");
const depth = 12;
const childrenPerLevel = 3;

/**
 * @param {HTMLElement} parent
 * @param {boolean} isTick
 */
const addElement = (parent, isTick) => {
  const el = document.createElement("div");
  el.classList.add(isTick ? "tick" : "tock");
  parent.appendChild(el);
  return el;
};

let currLevel = [container];
let nextLevel = [];
for (let i = 0; i < depth; i++) {
  for (const parent of currLevel) {
    for (let j = 0; j < childrenPerLevel; j++) {
      nextLevel.push(addElement(parent, i % 2 === 0));
    }
  }
  currLevel = nextLevel;
  nextLevel = [];
}

Tests:

elementFromPoint 1K
const n = 1_000; const nsq = Math.floor(Math.sqrt(n)); const arr = Array(n).fill(0).map((v,i)=>i); arr.map((v,i)=>document.elementFromPoint(i%nsq, Math.floor(i/nsq)));
elementFromPoint 10K
const n = 10_000; const nsq = Math.floor(Math.sqrt(n)); const arr = Array(n).fill(0).map((v,i)=>i); arr.map((v,i)=>document.elementFromPoint(i%nsq, Math.floor(i/nsq)));
elementFromPoint 100K
const n = 100_000; const nsq = Math.floor(Math.sqrt(n)); const arr = Array(n).fill(0).map((v,i)=>i); arr.map((v,i)=>document.elementFromPoint(i%nsq, Math.floor(i/nsq)));
elementFromPoint 1M
const n = 1_000_000; const nsq = Math.floor(Math.sqrt(n)); const arr = Array(n).fill(0).map((v,i)=>i); arr.map((v,i)=>document.elementFromPoint(i%nsq, Math.floor(i/nsq)));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
elementFromPoint 1K
elementFromPoint 10K
elementFromPoint 100K
elementFromPoint 1M

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking framework called MeasureThat.net. The benchmark tests the performance of the `document.elementFromPoint()` method, which returns an element at a specific coordinate.

**Benchmark Definition JSON Analysis**

The Benchmark Definition JSON contains three main elements:

1. **Script Preparation Code**: This code sets up the test environment by creating a container div with a specified width and height. It also defines a recursive function `addElement` that creates child elements (div tags) inside the parent element, which will be used to simulate a hierarchical structure.
2. **Html Preparation Code**: This code defines the HTML template for the benchmark, including CSS styles for styling the container and its children.
3. **Individual Test Cases**: These test cases are defined in an array format, where each object represents a single test case. Each test case has a `Benchmark Definition` property that contains a JavaScript snippet that will be executed.

**Test Case Analysis**

Each test case generates an array of coordinates and iterates over it using the `map()` method, calling `document.elementFromPoint()` for each coordinate. The resulting elements are not collected or used in any way; they are simply discarded.

**Library and Functionality**

No external libraries are explicitly mentioned in the Benchmark Definition JSON. However, the `elementFromPoint()` function is a built-in JavaScript method that returns an element at a specific point within a document.

**Special JS Features**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Performance Comparison**

The benchmark compares the performance of the `document.elementFromPoint()` method for different array sizes (1K, 10K, 100K, and 1M). The results will likely show that the execution time increases with the size of the input array.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

There are two main approaches used in this benchmark:

Approach 1: Using a recursive function to create a hierarchical structure (Script Preparation Code).

Pros:

* Allows for easy modification of the test environment
* Can be useful for testing complex rendering scenarios

Cons:

* May introduce unnecessary overhead due to the recursive function calls
* Can lead to performance issues if the tree depth is too high

Approach 2: Using an array-based approach with `map()` (Individual Test Cases).

Pros:

* Simple and straightforward implementation
* Can be easily parallelized or optimized using JavaScript engines

Cons:

* May not accurately represent real-world rendering scenarios
* Can lead to performance issues due to the large input arrays

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to rewrite this benchmark, you could consider using other approaches or variations, such as:

1. **Using Web Workers**: To parallelize the test cases and reduce overall execution time.
2. **Utilizing GPU acceleration**: If the benchmark is computationally intensive, using GPU acceleration can provide significant performance boosts.
3. **Implementing a more realistic rendering scenario**: By adding additional elements or modifying the test environment to better simulate real-world rendering scenarios.
4. **Adding caching or memoization**: To improve performance by reducing the number of `document.elementFromPoint()` calls.

Keep in mind that each alternative approach will introduce its own trade-offs and potential pitfalls, so be sure to carefully evaluate the pros and cons before making any changes.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/117.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 117 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
elementFromPoint 1K	368.9 Ops/sec
elementFromPoint 10K	31.6 Ops/sec
elementFromPoint 100K	6.1 Ops/sec
elementFromPoint 1M	1.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

elementFromPoint4 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: elementFromPoint 1K vs elementFromPoint 10K vs elementFromPoint 100K vs elementFromPoint 1M

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

elementFromPoint 1K

elementFromPoint 10K

elementFromPoint 100K

elementFromPoint 1M

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):