Benchmark: tagName vs nodeName

Script Preparation code:

var tags = Array.from({
    length: 100
}, () => ["div", "span", "abbr", "table", "div", "main", "section", "aside", "span", "p", "h2", "h3", "p", "div"]).flat();
tags.splice(987, 0, "unknown");
var els = tags.map((tag) => document.createElement(tag));

Tests:

tagName
for (const el of els) { if (el.tagName === "unknown") { break; } }
nodeName
for (const el of els) { if (el.nodeName === "unknown") { break; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
tagName
nodeName

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/139.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/139.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 139 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
tagName	14486.5 Ops/sec
nodeName	14565.7 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark is testing two approaches to check if an element has a specific tag name or node name:

1. `tagName`: Checks if the `tagName` property of the `el` element matches the string "unknown".
2. `nodeName`: Checks if the `nodeName` property of the `el` element matches the string "unknown".

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates an array of 100 tag names and then inserts a new unknown tag at index 987. It then maps over this array to create an array of HTML elements using `document.createElement`.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means the benchmark assumes that the test will be run on a blank or empty document.

**Individual Test Cases**

The two individual test cases are:

1. **tagName**: Iterates over the created HTML elements and breaks out of the loop if any element's `tagName` property matches "unknown".
2. **nodeName**: Iterates over the created HTML elements and breaks out of the loop if any element's `nodeName` property matches "unknown".

**Pros and Cons**

1. **`tagName` approach**:
	* Pros: More straightforward and easier to understand.
	* Cons: The browser may need to perform more work to get the tag name (e.g., resolving the internal ID of the node).
2. **`nodeName` approach**:
	* Pros: Faster, as it only requires getting the `nodeName` property directly from the element.
	* Cons: Less intuitive and might be less accurate in some cases.

It's worth noting that modern browsers have optimized `tagName` and `nodeName` retrieval, so both approaches should be relatively fast. However, the `nodeName` approach is generally considered more efficient.

**Library Used**

The benchmark uses the JavaScript `document.createElement` function to create HTML elements. The purpose of this function is to allow developers to programmatically add new HTML elements to a document.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There doesn't appear to be any special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. It's a straightforward example that focuses on comparing the performance of two different approaches.

**Other Alternatives**

To run similar benchmarks, you could use other testing frameworks or libraries that provide similar functionality, such as:

1. **Benchmark.js**: A popular benchmarking library for Node.js.
2. **jsbench**: A lightweight JavaScript benchmarking tool.
3. **Google Benchmark**: A high-performance benchmarking framework designed specifically for JavaScript.

Keep in mind that the specific implementation and testing environment will affect the results of any benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

tagName vs nodeName (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: tagName vs nodeName

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

tagName

nodeName

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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