Benchmark: Multiple: Only _style [vs] _style e clientHeight

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="teste">teste</div>

Script Preparation code:

var teste_n = '123px';
var _style = window.getComputedStyle(document.getElementById('teste'));

Tests:

Multiple: Only _style
parseFloat(_style['margin-top']) parseFloat(_style['margin-bottom']) parseFloat(_style['height'])
Multiple: _style e clientHeight
parseFloat(_style['margin-top']) parseFloat(_style['margin-bottom']) document.getElementById('teste').clientHeight;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Multiple: Only _style
Multiple: _style e clientHeight

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what is being tested in the benchmark.

**Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test on the MeasureThat.net website. The goal of this test is to compare the performance of two approaches when accessing styles and properties related to an HTML element.

**Benchmark Definition**

The first part of the JSON defines the overall benchmark, which has several key components:

*   **Name**: A unique name for the benchmark.
*   **Description**: An optional description of the benchmark, but it's empty in this case.
*   **Script Preparation Code**: A JavaScript code snippet that prepares the environment for the test. In this case, it sets a variable `teste_n` to a string value and retrieves the computed style of an HTML element using `window.getComputedStyle`.
*   **Html Preparation Code**: A HTML snippet that defines the structure of the webpage being tested.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two individual test cases:

1.  **"Multiple: Only _style"`**: This test case retrieves three properties (`margin-top`, `margin-bottom`, and `height`) directly from the `_style` object obtained using `window.getComputedStyle`.
2.  **"Multiple: _style e clientHeight"`**: This test case also retrieves three properties, but it uses a different approach by calling `document.getElementById('teste').clientHeight` to get the height of the element.

**Libraries and Features**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided JSON data. However, `window.getComputedStyle` is a built-in JavaScript API that provides access to an element's computed style.

The test case uses special JavaScript syntax:

*   **`_style`**: This notation refers to the result of calling `window.getComputedStyle(document.getElementById('teste'))`, which returns an object containing various properties related to the HTML element.
*   **`parseFloat()`**: This function is used to extract numeric values from the `_style` object.

**Pros and Cons**

Comparing these two approaches:

*   **"Multiple: Only _style"`**:
    *   Pros:
        *   Directly accessing style properties using `window.getComputedStyle`.
        *   Might be more straightforward for developers familiar with this API.
    *   Cons:
        *   May not be as efficient due to the overhead of calling `window.getComputedStyle` and parsing its output.
*   **"Multiple: _style e clientHeight"`**:
    *   Pros:
        *   Uses a potentially more efficient approach by calling `clientHeight`, which might reduce execution time.
        *   Might be easier to read for developers unfamiliar with `window.getComputedStyle`.
    *   Cons:
        *   Requires accessing the `clientHeight` property, which may not always be available or up-to-date.

**Other Considerations**

When running this benchmark, it's essential to consider factors like:

*   **Browser Support**: Ensure that the test works across various browsers and versions.
*   **HTML Element Existence**: Verify that the HTML element with the ID "teste" exists in the prepared HTML code.
*   **Style Property Availability**: Check if all style properties used in the benchmark are available for the target HTML elements.

**Alternatives**

If you need to compare performance or optimize code related to accessing styles and properties, consider using:

*   **`getComputedStyle()` API alternatives**: Depending on your use case, you might be able to find alternative approaches that provide similar functionality with potentially better performance.
*   **CSSOM Traversal**: For more complex scenarios, CSSOM traversal APIs like `document.body.style.cssText` or `window.getComputedStyle(document.body).cssText` can help navigate style sheets and compute values.

In summary, the provided benchmark compares two approaches to accessing styles and properties related to an HTML element. While both methods have pros and cons, choosing the right approach depends on your specific requirements, browser support, and performance considerations.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/75.0.3770.80 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 75 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Multiple: Only _style	280998.1 Ops/sec
Multiple: _style e clientHeight	342842.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Multiple: Only _style [vs] _style e clientHeight (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Multiple: Only _style vs Multiple: _style e clientHeight

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Multiple: Only _style

Multiple: _style e clientHeight

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):