Benchmark: JQuery - CSS vs height (2)

HTML Preparation code:

<p id="image">IMAGE</p>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>

Tests:

.css({height:X})
$("#image").css({height:'400px'});
.height()
$("#image").height(400);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
.css({height:X})
.height()

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 break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing two different approaches to set the height of an HTML element in jQuery:

1. `.$css({height:X})`
2. `.height()`

Both tests aim to find the most efficient way to set the height of an element with a value of 400 pixels.

**Options Compared**

In this case, we're comparing two different options for setting the height of an HTML element:

* Option 1: `.$css({height:X})` - This approach uses jQuery's `.css()` method, which sets a CSS property on an element.
* Option 2: `.height()` - This approach directly accesses the `height` property of the element.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each option:

1. **.$css({height:X})**:
	* Pros:
		+ More flexible, as it allows you to set any CSS property.
		+ Can be used with other libraries or frameworks that support jQuery's `.css()` method.
	* Cons:
		+ May have additional overhead due to the need to set a CSS property.
		+ May not be optimized for performance in this specific case (setting height).
2. **.height()**:
	* Pros:
		+ More direct and efficient, as it only accesses the `height` property of the element.
	* Cons:
		+ Less flexible, as it can only set the `height` property.

**Other Considerations**

In this case, there are no other notable considerations or special JS features/syntax being used.

**Library**

The benchmark uses jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling. The `.css()` method is part of jQuery's API, allowing developers to set CSS properties on elements.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There isn't any special JavaScript feature or syntax being used in this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

* Using a library like Velocity.js or Velocity Lite, which provide optimized DOM manipulation and event handling APIs.
* Implementing the height setting using CSS only (e.g., `style.height = '400px'`).
* Using a framework like React or Angular, which provide their own ways of manipulating the DOM.

Keep in mind that each alternative may have its own trade-offs and performance characteristics.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/78.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 78 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
.css({height:X})	276889.7 Ops/sec
.height()	288969.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JQuery - CSS vs height (2) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: .css({height:X}) vs .height()

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

.css({height:X})

.height()

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):