Benchmark: checking if nodeValue is equal vs simply setting it

Script Preparation code:

var text = document.createTextNode("hello world");
var newNodeValue = "hello world";

Tests:

checking previous text
if (text.nodeValue !== newNodeValue) { text.nodeValue = newNodeValue; }
setting nodeValue
text.nodeValue = newNodeValue;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
checking previous text
setting nodeValue

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 benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Purpose**

The purpose of this benchmark is to compare two approaches for setting or checking the `nodeValue` property of an HTML `textNode`. The test cases aim to measure which approach is faster and more efficient in terms of execution time.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Checking previous text**: This test case checks if the current value of `nodeValue` is equal to the expected value (`newValue`). If not, it sets the `nodeValue` property.
2. **Setting nodeValue**: This test case simply sets the `nodeValue` property directly.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. Checking equality using `!==` operator
2. Direct assignment using simple syntax (`text.nodeValue = newNodeValue;`)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Checking Equality using `!==` Operator:**

Pros:

* Provides a clear indication if the value has changed
* Can be used in conditional statements

Cons:

* May incur additional overhead due to the comparison operation

**Direct Assignment using Simple Syntax:**

Pros:

* Directly sets the value without any intermediate operations
* May be faster and more efficient, as it eliminates the need for a comparison operation

Cons:

* Does not provide a clear indication if the value has changed
* May lead to silent failures or unexpected behavior if the assignment fails

**Library Usage:**

None of the test cases use any external libraries. However, the benchmark is likely using some internal JavaScript implementation details that are not exposed publicly.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require specific knowledge to understand.

**Other Alternatives:**

If you were to rewrite this benchmark with different test cases or approaches, you might consider adding scenarios such as:

* Using a different data type (e.g., string vs. number)
* Introducing errors or invalid values during the comparison or assignment
* Using more complex DOM structures or node types
* Measuring the impact of parallel execution or concurrent testing on performance

By experimenting with these alternative test cases, you could gain a deeper understanding of the nuances and challenges involved in optimizing JavaScript performance.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_6) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/13.0.5 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 13 on Mac OS X 10.14.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
checking previous text	3651993.5 Ops/sec
setting nodeValue	3255960.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

checking if nodeValue is equal vs simply setting it (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: checking previous text vs setting nodeValue

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

checking previous text

setting nodeValue

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):