<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>
htmlstring = '<div class="pie"><a href="example.com"></div><br><p>blah</p><div class="something"><p>content</p></div>'
$(document.body).append($(htmlstring));
$(document.body).append($.parseHTML(htmlstring));
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
jQuery(htmlstring) | |
jQuery.parseHTML(htmlstring) |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
jQuery(htmlstring) | 18282.9 Ops/sec |
jQuery.parseHTML(htmlstring) | 3286.2 Ops/sec |
I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its results.
Benchmark Overview
The provided JSON defines two individual test cases, both using jQuery to manipulate HTML strings. The tests aim to compare the performance of jQuery's append
method with its parseHTML
method when dealing with a specific HTML string.
Options Compared
In this benchmark, two options are compared:
Pros and Cons of Each Approach
Library: jQuery
jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation and provides a convenient API for working with HTML documents. In this benchmark, jQuery's append
and parseHTML
methods are used to compare their performance when handling HTML strings.
Special JS Feature/Syntax (None)
This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond standard ECMAScript 5/ES6.
Other Alternatives
If you're looking for alternatives to jQuery, some popular options include:
For more efficient HTML manipulation, you might also consider using:
parseHTML
method.Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics, so it's essential to evaluate them based on your specific use case and requirements.