Benchmark: JQuery - CSS vs height

HTML Preparation code:

<p id="image">IMAGE</p>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>

Tests:

css()
$("#image").css({height: '400px'});
height()
$("#image").height(400);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
css()
height()

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 and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark definition consists of two test cases:

1. `css()`: This test case measures the execution time of setting the CSS style for an element using jQuery.
2. `height()`: This test case measures the execution time of setting the height attribute directly on an element.

**Options being compared:**

* **CSS vs Height**: The benchmark is comparing two approaches to set the height of an HTML element:
	+ Approach 1: Using jQuery's `.css()` method to set the CSS style.
	+ Approach 2: Setting the `height` attribute directly using jQuery's `.height()` method.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **CSS (`.css()`) approach:**
	+ Pros:
		- Allows for more flexibility in setting CSS styles, as it provides a way to specify multiple properties at once.
		- Can be useful when working with complex CSS layouts or animations.
	+ Cons:
		- May introduce additional overhead due to the JavaScript execution and parsing of the CSS syntax.
* **Height (`.height()`) approach:**
	+ Pros:
		- Faster and more lightweight, as it only sets a single attribute value.
		- Typically faster for simple height adjustments.
	+ Cons:
		- Limited flexibility in setting CSS styles, as it only allows for direct attribute manipulation.

**Library and its purpose:**

* The jQuery library is being used to simplify the testing process by providing a familiar API for working with HTML elements. Specifically, the `.css()` method is used to set CSS styles, while the `.height()` method sets the `height` attribute directly.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**
There are no specific JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two different approaches to set an element's height using jQuery.

**Other alternatives:**

* Other approaches to setting an element's height could include:
	+ Using CSS stylesheets (e.g., `<style>...</style>`) instead of jQuery's `.css()` method.
	+ Utilizing browser-specific APIs, such as `DOMMatrixStyle` in WebKit-based browsers or `CSSStyleDeclaration` in other browsers.
	+ Implementing custom JavaScript functions to set the height attribute directly.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have varying levels of performance, compatibility, and complexity, making them suitable for different use cases.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:72.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/72.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 72 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
css()	90039.8 Ops/sec
height()	106684.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JQuery - CSS vs height (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: css() vs height()

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

css()

height()

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):