Benchmark: createElement vs cloneNode with option and fragment

Tests:

createElement
var datalist = document.createElement('datalist') n = 0, node = document.createElement('option'); while(true) { n++; let o = document.createElement('option') o.value = n.toString() datalist.appendChild(o); if(n===5000) break; }
cloneNode
var datalist = document.createElement('datalist') n = 0, node = document.createElement('option'); while(true) { n++; let o = node.cloneNode(false) o.value = n.toString() datalist.appendChild(o); if(n===5000) break; }
cloneNode fragment
var f = new DocumentFragment() var datalist = document.createElement('datalist') n = 0, node = document.createElement('option'); while(true) { n++; let o = node.cloneNode(false) o.value = n.toString() f.appendChild(o); if(n===5000) break; } datalist.appendChild(f)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
createElement
cloneNode
cloneNode fragment

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days 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 designed to compare three approaches for creating new DOM elements:

1. `createElement`: Creating a new element using the `document.createElement()` method.
2. `cloneNode`: Cloning an existing element using the `node.cloneNode(false)` method, which creates a new copy of the node without cloning its child nodes.
3. `cloneNode fragment`: Using a `DocumentFragment` to create a new container for cloned elements.

**Options Compared:**

* In `createElement`, the only option is creating a new element using `document.createElement('datalist')`.
* In `cloneNode`, the only option is cloning an existing element using `node.cloneNode(false)`. Note that this method creates a shallow copy of the node, without cloning its child nodes.
* In `cloneNode fragment`, a new `DocumentFragment` is created and used to clone elements. This approach allows for more efficient cloning by avoiding the creation of unnecessary DOM nodes.

**Pros and Cons:**

* `createElement`: Simple and straightforward, but may lead to slower performance due to the overhead of creating a new element.
* `cloneNode`: Faster than `createElement`, as it reuses existing node resources, but may be less efficient when dealing with large amounts of data or complex elements. This method can also lead to memory leaks if not used carefully.
* `cloneNode fragment`: The most efficient approach, as it minimizes the creation of unnecessary DOM nodes and avoids potential memory issues. However, this method requires an additional step to append the cloned elements to a new container.

**Library:**
In all test cases, no specific library is used beyond the built-in JavaScript DOM API. However, some custom functions or variables (e.g., `n`, `node`, `o`) are defined within each benchmark definition.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**
None of the provided benchmark definitions rely on any special JavaScript features or syntax that would affect their execution or meaning. The code is straightforward and easily understandable by most software engineers.

**Other Alternatives:**
If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches for creating DOM elements, here are a few options:

1. **Template literals**: Using template literals (e.g., `<>`) to create new elements can be faster than the traditional `createElement` method.
2. **HTML templates**: Leveraging HTML templates (e.g., `<template>...</template>`) can provide an efficient way to generate DOM content, especially for large datasets.
3. **Libraries like LitElement or React**: Using libraries that abstract away the complexities of DOM manipulation and provide a more declarative approach to building user interfaces.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may come with their own set of trade-offs, such as increased complexity or dependencies on external libraries.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
createElement	196.4 Ops/sec
cloneNode	200.6 Ops/sec
cloneNode fragment	177.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

createElement vs cloneNode with option and fragment (version: 0)

Faster way to create new dom elements before insertion

Comparing performance of: createElement vs cloneNode vs cloneNode fragment

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

createElement

cloneNode

cloneNode fragment

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):