Benchmark: cloneMultiple vs cloneNode

HTML Preparation code:

<ul id="container"></ul>

Script Preparation code:

var cloneMultiple = function (elem, times, deep) {
   let fragment = document.createDocumentFragment();
   fragment.appendChild(elem.cloneNode(deep));
   if (times <= 1) {
       return fragment;
   }

   let i = 1,
       rest = [];

   while((times % 2 === 0 || !!(rest[i] = 1 && --times)) && (times /= 2) && times >3 ) {
        i += 1;  
   }

   while ( times > 1 ) {
      fragment.appendChild(elem.cloneNode(deep));
      --times;
   }

    for ( ; i; --i ) {
      fragment.appendChild(fragment.cloneNode(true));   
      rest[i] && fragment.appendChild(elem.cloneNode(deep));
    }
   
   return fragment;
}

Tests:

cloneMultiple
var li = document.createElement('li'), container = document.getElementById('container'); container.appendChild(cloneMultiple(li, 10, true));
cloneNode
var li = document.createElement('li'), container = document.getElementById('container'); for (t = 0; t < 10; t++) { var cloneLi = li.cloneNode(); container.appendChild(cloneLi); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
cloneMultiple
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.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons of those approaches, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test compares two JavaScript methods for cloning DOM elements: `cloneMultiple` and `cloneNode`. The goal is to determine which method performs better in terms of execution speed.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines the `cloneMultiple` function, which takes three parameters:

* `elem`: the element to be cloned
* `times`: the number of times to clone the element
* `deep`: a boolean indicating whether to perform a deep clone (i.e., cloning all child nodes)

The function creates a document fragment and appends the original element to it, which serves as the initial clone. Then, it enters a loop that clones the element `times` number of times, with each iteration halving the number of clones until only one clone remains.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code defines a simple `<ul>` element with an ID of "container", which will be used to append cloned elements.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. `cloneMultiple`
	* The benchmark definition uses the `cloneMultiple` function with 10 clones, all deep (i.e., cloning child nodes).
2. `cloneNode`
	* The benchmark definition uses a simple loop that clones an element 10 times using the `cloneNode` method.

**Comparison and Analysis**

Both methods have their pros and cons:

**Clone Multiple**

Pros:

* Can clone elements in a more efficient way, especially when cloning multiple nodes at once.
* May be faster due to reduced overhead from creating new DOM elements.

Cons:

* Requires specifying the number of clones explicitly, which can lead to errors if not done correctly.
* Performs a deep clone by default, which may consume more memory and have slower performance than shallow copying.

**Clone Node**

Pros:

* Simple and easy to use, with minimal boilerplate code required.
* Performs shallow copying, which is faster and uses less memory.

Cons:

* Less efficient for cloning multiple nodes at once.
* May be slower due to the overhead of creating new DOM elements.

**Library Used**

In both test cases, no specific library or framework is used. The benchmark only focuses on the JavaScript built-in methods `cloneMultiple` and `cloneNode`.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

No special features or syntax are used in these benchmarks.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two methods, consider the following:

* If you need to clone a large number of elements at once, `cloneMultiple` might be more efficient.
* If you only need to clone a small number of elements and want simplicity, `cloneNode` might be sufficient.
* Keep in mind that both methods have their trade-offs in terms of performance and memory usage.

**Alternative Methods**

Other alternatives for cloning DOM elements include:

* Using a library like jQuery's `.clone()` method or the `DOMParser`.html()` method.
* Implementing custom cloning logic using a combination of `createDocumentFragment`, `appendChild`, and other DOM methods.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/68.0.3440.106 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 68 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
cloneMultiple	25091.2 Ops/sec
cloneNode	8020.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

cloneMultiple vs cloneNode (version: 10)

Comparing performance of: cloneMultiple vs cloneNode

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

cloneMultiple

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):