Benchmark: JQuery: find with selected selector vs filter selected selector

HTML Preparation code:

<select id="items">
  <option value="1"></option>
  <option value="2"></option>
  <option value="3"></option>
  <option value="4"></option>
  <option value="5"></option>
  <option value="6"></option>
  <option value="7"></option>
  <option value="8"></option>
  <option value="9"></option>
  <option value="10"></option>
</select>

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.4.1/jquery.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var $itemsElement = $("#items");
$itemsElement.val("5");

Tests:

with selected selector
$itemsElement.find("option:selected");
with selected selector in filter
$itemsElement.find("option").filter(":selected");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
with selected selector
with selected selector in filter

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 break down what is being tested in the provided JSON benchmark.

**Main Goal:**
The main goal of this benchmark is to compare two approaches for optimizing the selection of a specific option in an HTML select element using jQuery.

**Approaches Compared:**

1. **`$itemsElement.find("option:selected")`**: This approach uses the `find()` method and specifies the exact selector `"option:selected"`. The idea behind this approach is that it directly selects the selected option without any further filtering.
2. **`$itemsElement.find("option").filter(":selected")`**: This approach uses the `find()` method to select all options, and then applies the `.filter()` method with the `:selected` pseudo-class. The idea behind this approach is that it first selects all options, and then filters out the ones that are not selected.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **`$itemsElement.find("option:selected")`**:
	* Pros: Directly selects the selected option, potentially faster execution.
	* Cons: May throw an error if there's no selected option (e.g., if the select element is empty or has no options).
2. **`$itemsElement.find("option").filter(":selected")`**:
	* Pros: Handles cases where there's no selected option by filtering out all options, potentially more robust.
	* Cons: May be slower due to the additional filtering step.

**Library and Its Purpose:**
The benchmark uses jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling. The `find()` method is used to select elements based on their CSS selectors, while the `.filter()` method is used to apply conditions to an array of selected elements.

**Special JS Features or Syntax:**
There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives:**
If you were to implement a similar benchmark for optimizing the selection of a specific option, you might consider other approaches, such as:

* Using a `map()` function to create an array of selected options.
* Using a `reduce()` function to iterate over all options and find the first selected one.
* Using a library like Lodash or Ramda, which provide utility functions for working with arrays and objects.

However, these alternatives might not be as straightforward to implement and test as the jQuery approaches, so it's essential to consider their pros and cons before choosing an alternative approach.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
with selected selector	308109.5 Ops/sec
with selected selector in filter	295143.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JQuery: find with selected selector vs filter selected selector (version: 0)

find the best solution for optimize getting selected option

Comparing performance of: with selected selector vs with selected selector in filter

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

with selected selector

with selected selector in filter

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):