Benchmark: JS: append vs appendChild

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="container"></div>

Script Preparation code:

var container = document.getElementById("container");
var paragraph = document.createElement("p");

Tests:

append
container.append(paragraph);
appendChild
container.appendChild(paragraph);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
append
appendChild

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'd be happy to help explain the benchmark and its results.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark compares two methods for appending an HTML paragraph element to a container element in JavaScript: `container.append(paragraph)` and `container.appendChild(paragraph)`. Both methods are used to add content to an element, but they differ in their implementation details.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. `append`: Uses the `append()` method on the `container` element.
2. `appendChild`: Uses the `appendChild()` method on the `container` element.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **`append()` Method**
	* Pros:
		+ Often considered more concise and easier to read.
		+ May be faster, as it's a single operation that doesn't involve creating an intermediate element.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be supported by older browsers or environments that don't implement this method.
		+ Can lead to issues with DOM manipulation, as the append operation can cause unexpected side effects.
2. **`appendChild()` Method**
	* Pros:
		+ Widely supported and reliable across all modern browsers and environments.
		+ Allows for more fine-grained control over the DOM structure.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be less concise and more verbose than the `append()` method.
		+ May be slower due to the creation of an intermediate element.

**Library and Purpose**

The `Element.prototype.append()` and `Element.prototype.appendChild()` methods are part of the HTML5 DOM API, which provides a standard way for JavaScript applications to interact with web pages. These methods allow developers to add content to elements in a consistent and reliable manner.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors:

* Browser support: If you need to support older browsers or environments that don't implement `append()` or `appendChild()`, you may want to use one of them.
* DOM manipulation: If you're performing complex DOM manipulations, using `appendChild()` can provide more control and flexibility.
* Performance: If performance is a concern, using `append()` might be faster due to its single operation nature.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches for appending content to an element include:

* Using the `innerHTML` property: `container.innerHTML += paragraph.outerHTML;`
	+ Pros: Fast and simple. Cons: Can lead to XSS vulnerabilities if not sanitized properly.
* Using a library or framework: Some libraries, like jQuery, provide their own methods for appending content (e.g., `$('\#container').append(paragraph)`).
* Manual string concatenation: `container.appendChild(document.createTextNode(' ' + paragraph.outerHTML));`
	+ Pros: Portable and compatible with older browsers. Cons: Can lead to slower performance due to the creation of an intermediate element.

Keep in mind that these alternative approaches may have different trade-offs in terms of performance, security, and maintainability.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 14 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
append	1588436.6 Ops/sec
appendChild	1854125.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JS: append vs appendChild (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: append vs appendChild

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

append

appendChild

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):