Benchmark: isOrIn alternatives

HTML Preparation code:

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

AخA
 
<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'));
var $body = $(document.body)
var isOrIn = function isOrIn(container, contained){
  var found = false;
  if(!container || !contained){
  }else if(contained===container){
   found=true;
  } else{
    var pointer = contained;
    var parent = pointer.parentNode;

    while(parent && pointer!==container){
      if(parent === container){
          found=true;
          break;
      }
      pointer = parent;
      parent = pointer.parentNode;
    }

  }
  return found;
}

​x
 
//Add 100,000 elementsvar 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'));var $body = $(document.body)var isOrIn = function isOrIn(container, contained){  var found = false;  if(!container || !contained){  }else if(contained===container){   found=true;  } else{    var pointer = contained;    var parent = pointer.parentNode;​    while(parent && pointer!==container){      if(parent === container){          found=true;          break;      }      pointer = parent;      parent = pointer.parentNode;    }​  }  return found;}

Tests:

is() or contains()
var found = $body.is($innerOne) || $.contains($body[0],$innerOne[0]);
var found = $body.is($innerOne) || $.contains($body[0],$innerOne[0]);
== or contains()
var body = $body[0]; var innerOne = $innerOne[0]; var found = body==innerOne || $.contains(body,innerOne);
var body = $body[0];
var innerOne = $innerOne[0];
var found = body==innerOne || $.contains(body,innerOne);
!!closest.length
var found = !!$innerOne.closest($body).length;
var found = !!$innerOne.closest($body).length;
== and parentNodes
var found = isOrIn($body[0],$innerOne[0]);
var found = isOrIn($body[0],$innerOne[0]);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

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

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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()	1061705.0 Ops/sec
== or contains()	2149648.8 Ops/sec
!!closest.length	617344.7 Ops/sec
== and parentNodes	3007692.2 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

Measuring the performance of different approaches to check if an element is or is contained within another in JavaScript can be a fascinating benchmarking exercise.

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test that evaluates four different methods:

is() method: This approach uses the is() function provided by jQuery, which checks if two elements are equal.
contains() method: This approach uses the contains() function provided by jQuery, which checks if an element contains another element.
Direct comparison using ==: This approach directly compares two elements using the == operator to check for equality.
Using the closest() method and !! operator: This approach uses the closest() method, which finds the closest ancestor of a given element that matches a specified selector, and then uses the !! operator to check if the result is truthy.

Now, let's analyze the pros and cons of each approach:

is() method:
- Pros: Quick and efficient, as it leverages the optimized is() function in jQuery.
- Cons: May not be suitable for all use cases, especially when dealing with complex element relationships or custom elements.
contains() method:
- Pros: Useful when checking if an element contains another element, which might be necessary in certain scenarios (e.g., event handling).
- Cons: Might be slower than direct comparisons due to the additional function call and potential overhead of the contains() function.
Direct comparison using ==:
- Pros: Simple and straightforward, as it doesn't require any additional functions or overhead.
- Cons: May not work correctly for all cases, especially when dealing with complex element relationships or custom elements. The browser may use optimized equality checks, but this approach is still slower than the optimized is() function in jQuery.
Using the closest() method and !! operator:
- Pros: Convenient and concise way to check if an element has a closest ancestor matching a selector, followed by a simple boolean conversion using !!.
- Cons: Might be slower due to the overhead of the closest() function and the !! operator. Additionally, this approach may not work correctly for all cases, especially when dealing with complex element relationships or custom elements.

In terms of performance, the optimized is() function in jQuery is likely to be the fastest option, followed by direct comparisons using ==. The contains() method and the closest() method + !! operator approach are less efficient due to their additional overhead.

Other alternatives that could be considered for this benchmark include:

Using a custom implementation of the check logic, potentially leveraging native JavaScript methods or more advanced DOM traversal techniques.
Employing other libraries or frameworks that provide optimized equality checks or element containment functions (e.g., Lodash, Underscore.js).
Investigating browser-specific optimizations or features, such as Chrome's Element.contains() method or Edge's contains() function.

Keep in mind that the performance results may vary depending on the specific use case and the characteristics of the input elements.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of different approaches to check if an element is or is contained within another in JavaScript can be a fascinating benchmarking exercise.

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test that evaluates four different methods:

1. **`is()` method**: This approach uses the `is()` function provided by jQuery, which checks if two elements are equal.
2. **`contains()` method**: This approach uses the `contains()` function provided by jQuery, which checks if an element contains another element.
3. **Direct comparison using `==`**: This approach directly compares two elements using the `==` operator to check for equality.
4. **Using the `closest()` method and `!!` operator**: This approach uses the `closest()` method, which finds the closest ancestor of a given element that matches a specified selector, and then uses the `!!` operator to check if the result is truthy.

Now, let's analyze the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **`is()` method**:
	* Pros: Quick and efficient, as it leverages the optimized `is()` function in jQuery.
	* Cons: May not be suitable for all use cases, especially when dealing with complex element relationships or custom elements.
2. **`contains()` method**:
	* Pros: Useful when checking if an element contains another element, which might be necessary in certain scenarios (e.g., event handling).
	* Cons: Might be slower than direct comparisons due to the additional function call and potential overhead of the `contains()` function.
3. **Direct comparison using `==`**:
	* Pros: Simple and straightforward, as it doesn't require any additional functions or overhead.
	* Cons: May not work correctly for all cases, especially when dealing with complex element relationships or custom elements. The browser may use optimized equality checks, but this approach is still slower than the optimized `is()` function in jQuery.
4. **Using the `closest()` method and `!!` operator**:
	* Pros: Convenient and concise way to check if an element has a closest ancestor matching a selector, followed by a simple boolean conversion using `!!`.
	* Cons: Might be slower due to the overhead of the `closest()` function and the `!!` operator. Additionally, this approach may not work correctly for all cases, especially when dealing with complex element relationships or custom elements.

In terms of performance, the optimized `is()` function in jQuery is likely to be the fastest option, followed by direct comparisons using `==`. The `contains()` method and the `closest()` method + `!!` operator approach are less efficient due to their additional overhead.

Other alternatives that could be considered for this benchmark include:

* Using a custom implementation of the check logic, potentially leveraging native JavaScript methods or more advanced DOM traversal techniques.
* Employing other libraries or frameworks that provide optimized equality checks or element containment functions (e.g., Lodash, Underscore.js).
* Investigating browser-specific optimizations or features, such as Chrome's `Element.contains()` method or Edge's `contains()` function.

Keep in mind that the performance results may vary depending on the specific use case and the characteristics of the input elements.

Related benchmarks:

isOrIn alternatives (version: 0)

Testing different methods of checking whether an element is or is in another element. Start from the position where you have jquery objects. Make === or parentNodes a function call

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 6 months ago):