Benchmark: Dev test1 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="test">1</div>

Script Preparation code:

var div = document.getElementById("test");
var txt = "'1,2,3,4'";

Tests:

1
div.textContent = txt;
2
div.innerHTML = txt;
3
div.firstChild.nodeValue = txt;
4
div.innerText = txt;
5
if(div.firstChild && div.firstChild.nodeType === 3){ div.innerText = txt; }else{ div.firstChild.nodeValue = txt; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1
2
3
4
5

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

To measure the performance of different methods for setting text content in an HTML element, the provided benchmark tests various approaches.

**Options Compared:**

1. `div.textContent = txt;`: This approach uses the `textContent` property to set the text content of the element. It's a modern and concise way to do so.
2. `div.innerHTML = txt;`: This approach uses the `innerHTML` property to set the HTML content of the element, including any text within it.
3. `div.firstChild.nodeValue = txt;`: This approach first accesses the child node of the element (in this case, a text node) and then sets its `nodeValue` property.
4. `div.innerText = txt;`: Similar to `textContent`, but only updates the text content without removing any existing HTML elements within the element.
5. The fifth test case uses an `if-else` statement to check if the first child node of the element exists before setting the text content.

**Pros and Cons:**

* `div.textContent = txt;`: Pros - concise, modern, and efficient. Cons - not supported in older browsers or Internet Explorer.
* `div.innerHTML = txt;`: Pros - works everywhere, but can be slow since it also sets HTML content, not just plain text. Cons - may not preserve whitespace or other formatting characters.
* `div.firstChild.nodeValue = txt;`: Pros - efficient and fast for setting text content, but can be slower if the element has multiple child nodes. Cons - requires accessing specific child nodes, which might be a drawback in some cases.
* `div.innerText = txt;`: Pros - similar to `textContent`, but with an added layer of safety (it won't set HTML elements). Cons - may not work as expected if there are other content types within the element.
* Fifth test case: Pros - handles cases where text content might be overridden by other elements, but requires more complex logic. Cons - may be slower due to the `if-else` statement.

**Library and Purpose:**

None of the tests use any external libraries. However, some features (like modern `textContent` support) are now supported natively in browsers, so they don't require additional libraries.

**Special JS Features or Syntax:**

The benchmark doesn't use any special JavaScript features like async/await, Promises, Web Workers, or others.

**Other Alternatives:**

In addition to the above options, there are other ways to set text content in an HTML element:

* Using `innerHTML` and then using a regular expression to remove any unnecessary whitespace characters.
* Setting the `nodeValue` property directly on each child node instead of relying on `textContent`.
* Using a library like jQuery (if available) which provides its own methods for setting text content.

It's worth noting that the choice of method depends on the specific use case, such as whether speed or flexibility is more important.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_11_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/54.0.2840.98 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 54 on Mac OS X 10.11.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
1	4753247.0 Ops/sec
2	320469.1 Ops/sec
3	4451088.5 Ops/sec
4	2803696.2 Ops/sec
5	1688686.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Dev test1 (version: 7)

Comparing performance of: 1 vs 2 vs 3 vs 4 vs 5

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

1

2

3

4

5

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):