Benchmark: isOrIn alternatives

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://ajax.aspnetcdn.com/ajax/jQuery/jquery-3.1.0.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

//Add 100,000 elements
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
for (var i=0; i<10; i++){
  var outDiv = document.createElement('div');
  for (var j=0; j<100; j++){
    var midDiv = document.createElement('div');
    for (var k=0; k<100; k++){
      var inDiv = document.createElement('div');
      if(i==6 && j==60){
        if(k==60)
          inDiv.id="one";
        else if(k==61)
          inDiv.id="two";
      }
      midDiv.appendChild(inDiv)
    }
    outDiv.appendChild(midDiv)
  }
  frag.appendChild(outDiv);
}
document.body.appendChild(frag);
var innerOne = document.getElementById('one');

Tests:

is() or contains()
var found = $(document.body).is(innerOne) || $.contains(document.body,innerOne);
== or contains()
var found = document.body==innerOne || $.contains(document.body,innerOne);
!!closest.length
var found = !!$(innerOne).closest(document.body).length;
== and parentNodes
var found = false; var container = document.body; if(innerOne===document.body){ found=true } else{ var pointer = innerOne; var parent = pointer.parentNode; while(parent && pointer!==container){ if(parent === container){ found=true; break; } pointer = parent; parent = pointer.parentNode; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
is() or contains()
== or contains()
!!closest.length
== and parentNodes

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to test different methods for checking whether an element is or is in another element. The input data is generated by creating a large document fragment with multiple elements, and then querying this fragment to find specific elements.

**Options Compared**

There are four main options compared in the benchmark:

1. **`is()`**: This method checks if an element matches a certain condition.
2. **`.contains()`**: This method checks if an element is contained within another element.
3. **`==`**: This operator checks for equality between two elements.
4. **`!!closest.length`**: This approach uses the `closest()` method to find the closest ancestor element and then checks its length.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of each option:

1. **`is()`**: Pros: Efficient, simple, and fast. Cons: May not work for complex conditions or elements with multiple matching criteria.
2. **`.contains()`**: Pros: Fast, but may not be supported by all browsers. Cons: Can be slow if the element is deeply nested within its container.
3. **`==`**: Pros: Simple and easy to understand. Cons: May not work for elements that don't have a direct parent-child relationship.
4. **`!!closest.length`**: Pros: Fast and efficient, but may require more DOM traversing than other methods. Cons: Can be slower for large documents.

**Libraries and Special JS Features**

* jQuery is used in the benchmark as a library to simplify DOM manipulation. Specifically, `$()` is used to wrap element queries.
* The `closest()` method is a part of the jQuery API, but it's also available in vanilla JavaScript (albeit with slightly different syntax).

**Test Cases**

Each test case represents a unique scenario for testing each option:

1. **`is() or contains()`**: Tests the efficiency of both methods against each other.
2. **`== or contains()`**: Tests the performance of equality checks (`==`) and `.contains()` separately.
3. **`!!closest.length`**: Tests the performance of using `closest()` to find an ancestor element and then checking its length.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches could be explored:

* Using `querySelectorAll()` or `getElementsByRegExp()` to select elements based on their attributes, classes, or values.
* Implementing a custom solution using recursion, loop iteration, or other techniques to traverse the DOM tree.
* Comparing performance with different element selection methods (e.g., using `getElementById()`, `getElementsByTagName()`, or `querySelector()`).

These alternatives might provide interesting insights into how elements are selected and searched in JavaScript, but they may not be as relevant for this specific benchmark.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/60.0.3112.113 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 60 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
is() or contains()	322371.5 Ops/sec
== or contains()	618009.3 Ops/sec
!!closest.length	251139.3 Ops/sec
== and parentNodes	805989.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

isOrIn alternatives (version: 0)

Testing different methods of checking whether an element is or is in another element

Comparing performance of: is() or contains() vs == or contains() vs !!closest.length vs == and parentNodes

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

is() or contains()

== or contains()

!!closest.length

== and parentNodes

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):