Benchmark: document.documentElement vs document.querySelector("html")

HTML Preparation code:

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
</head>
<body>
  <div id="foo"></div>
</body>
</html>

AخA
 
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
</head>
<body>
  <div id="foo"></div>
</body>
</html>

Tests:

querySelector
const pageBody = document.querySelector('html');
const pageBody = document.querySelector('html');
Direct access
const pageBody = document.documentElement;
const pageBody = document.documentElement;

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
querySelector
Direct access

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:133.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/133.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 133 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
querySelector	10085565.0 Ops/sec
Direct access	13648050.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 5 months ago):

The benchmark provided is designed to compare the performance of two different methods of accessing the root HTML element of a document in a web browser using JavaScript:

Direct Access using document.documentElement
Using querySelector with document.querySelector("html")

Test Cases Explained

Direct Access:
- Code: const pageBody = document.documentElement;
- This approach directly accesses the root element of the HTML document. The property documentElement is a predefined reference that returns the <html> element of the document.
Query Selector:
- Code: const pageBody = document.querySelector('html');
- This method utilizes the querySelector function, which is a more versatile and general-purpose method for selecting elements based on CSS selectors. In this case, it's specifically selecting the <html> element.

Performance Results

The benchmark results measured in ExecutionsPerSecond are as follows:

Direct access: 13,648,050 executions per second
querySelector: 10,085,565 executions per second

This indicates that the direct access method is more than 35% faster than the querySelector method in this particular execution context on the given hardware and browser platform.

Pros and Cons of Each Approach

Direct Access (`document.documentElement`)

Pros:
- Faster performance because it directly accesses the property without the overhead of parsing a selector string and evaluating it.
- More straightforward and less error-prone when retrieving the root element.
Cons:
- Less flexible since it doesn’t allow for more complex selections or filtering beyond the direct property reference.

`querySelector` (`document.querySelector('html')`)

Pros:
- More versatile: can select any element using a CSS selector, enabling complex queries beyond the root element.
- Can easily switch to select different elements without changing the fundamental method.
Cons:
- Slower performance due to the overhead of interpreting and executing the selector string.
- Slightly more complex in intent compared to the simplicity of direct property access.

Other Considerations

When performance is a critical factor, such as in high-frequency operations (like animations or when manipulating the DOM in response to user events), using direct access is advisable. In scenarios where you need more complex queries or want to operate on various selectors dynamically, querySelector is beneficial despite its performance cost.

Alternatives

Other alternatives to access the root HTML element in JavaScript include:

Using getElementsByTagName:
```
const pageBody = document.getElementsByTagName('html')[0];
```
This approach retrieves a live HTMLCollection of elements with the specified tag name. While it may offer benefits in specific use cases, it's generally less intuitive and can be slower than direct property access.
Using jQuery (if included in the project):
```
const pageBody = $('html');
```
While jQuery provides a powerful and flexible interface for DOM manipulation, it also adds significant overhead and dependency, making it generally less preferable for simple tasks compared to vanilla JavaScript.

In summary, developers should choose the method based on their specific use cases—favoring performance in critical paths while leveraging convenience and flexibility when necessary.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark provided is designed to compare the performance of two different methods of accessing the root HTML element of a document in a web browser using JavaScript:

1. **Direct Access** using `document.documentElement`
2. **Using `querySelector`** with `document.querySelector("html")`

### Test Cases Explained

- **Direct Access**: 
  - **Code**: `const pageBody = document.documentElement;`
  - This approach directly accesses the root element of the HTML document. The property `documentElement` is a predefined reference that returns the `<html>` element of the document.

- **Query Selector**:
  - **Code**: `const pageBody = document.querySelector('html');`
  - This method utilizes the `querySelector` function, which is a more versatile and general-purpose method for selecting elements based on CSS selectors. In this case, it's specifically selecting the `<html>` element.

### Performance Results

The benchmark results measured in `ExecutionsPerSecond` are as follows:
- **Direct access**: 13,648,050 executions per second
- **querySelector**: 10,085,565 executions per second

This indicates that the direct access method is more than 35% faster than the querySelector method in this particular execution context on the given hardware and browser platform.

### Pros and Cons of Each Approach

#### Direct Access (`document.documentElement`)
- **Pros**:
  - Faster performance because it directly accesses the property without the overhead of parsing a selector string and evaluating it.
  - More straightforward and less error-prone when retrieving the root element.
- **Cons**:
  - Less flexible since it doesn’t allow for more complex selections or filtering beyond the direct property reference.

#### `querySelector` (`document.querySelector('html')`)
- **Pros**:
  - More versatile: can select any element using a CSS selector, enabling complex queries beyond the root element.
  - Can easily switch to select different elements without changing the fundamental method.
- **Cons**:
  - Slower performance due to the overhead of interpreting and executing the selector string.
  - Slightly more complex in intent compared to the simplicity of direct property access.

### Other Considerations

When performance is a critical factor, such as in high-frequency operations (like animations or when manipulating the DOM in response to user events), using direct access is advisable. In scenarios where you need more complex queries or want to operate on various selectors dynamically, `querySelector` is beneficial despite its performance cost.

### Alternatives

Other alternatives to access the root HTML element in JavaScript include:
- **Using `getElementsByTagName`**: 
  ```javascript
  const pageBody = document.getElementsByTagName('html')[0];
  ```
  This approach retrieves a live HTMLCollection of elements with the specified tag name. While it may offer benefits in specific use cases, it's generally less intuitive and can be slower than direct property access.

- **Using jQuery (if included in the project)**:
  ```javascript
  const pageBody = $('html');
  ```
  While jQuery provides a powerful and flexible interface for DOM manipulation, it also adds significant overhead and dependency, making it generally less preferable for simple tasks compared to vanilla JavaScript.

In summary, developers should choose the method based on their specific use cases—favoring performance in critical paths while leveraging convenience and flexibility when necessary.

Related benchmarks:

document.documentElement vs document.querySelector("html") (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: querySelector vs Direct access

Created: 5 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

querySelector

Direct access

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 5 months ago):

Test Cases Explained

Performance Results

Pros and Cons of Each Approach

Direct Access (`document.documentElement`)

`querySelector` (`document.querySelector('html')`)

Other Considerations

Alternatives

document.documentElement vs document.querySelector("html") (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: querySelector vs Direct access

Created: 5 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

querySelector

Direct access

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 5 months ago):

Test Cases Explained

Performance Results

Pros and Cons of Each Approach

Direct Access (document.documentElement)

querySelector (document.querySelector('html'))

Other Considerations

Alternatives

Direct Access (`document.documentElement`)

`querySelector` (`document.querySelector('html')`)