Benchmark: is(visible) vs hasClass

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var myCanvas = $("#myCanvas");
myCanvas.addClass("visible");

Tests:

myCanvas.is(":visible")
myCanvas.is(":visible");
hasClass("visible");
myCanvas.hasClass("visible");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
myCanvas.is(":visible")
hasClass("visible");

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/79.0.3945.130 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 79 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
myCanvas.is(":visible")	237172.8 Ops/sec
hasClass("visible");	1366522.1 Ops/sec

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, compared, and discussed.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing two different approaches to check if an HTML element has a specific class attribute: `hasClass` (using jQuery) vs a custom function `is(visible)` that is likely implemented in JavaScript. The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches.

**Options compared**

The benchmark is comparing the following options:

1. **`hasClass`**: This is a method provided by the jQuery library, which checks if an element has a specific class attribute.
2. **Custom `is(visible)` function**: This is a custom implementation in JavaScript that likely uses the `innerHTML` property of the DOM element to check for the presence of the `visible` class.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **`hasClass` (jQuery)**:
	* Pros: Fast, widely supported, and well-tested.
	* Cons: Requires jQuery library to be loaded, which might add overhead.
2. **Custom `is(visible)` function**:
	* Pros: Does not require loading any additional libraries, potentially faster execution.
	* Cons: May have performance issues if the implementation is not optimized, or may not work as expected in certain cases.

**Library and its purpose**

The benchmark uses jQuery library, which is a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling. The `hasClass` method is a convenient way to check if an element has a specific class attribute without having to write custom code.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There is no special JS feature or syntax mentioned in the provided benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some modern JavaScript features like ES6 classes, async/await, and arrow functions are not used in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you want to implement a custom `is(visible)` function without using jQuery, you could use other approaches such as:

1. Using the `className` property of the DOM element.
2. Implementing a simple class-checking algorithm using bitwise operations or regular expressions.

Here's an example implementation of the custom `is(visible)` function:
```javascript
function is(visible) {
  return myCanvas.className.includes('visible');
}
```
Keep in mind that this implementation has its own set of trade-offs and potential performance issues.

Related benchmarks:

is(visible) vs hasClass (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: myCanvas.is(":visible") vs hasClass("visible");

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

myCanvas.is(":visible")

hasClass("visible");

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):