Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Offsets only vs computedStyle
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Offsets only vs ComputedStyle only vs Both
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<div id="box">wut</div>
Script Preparation code:
let box = document.getElementById('box');
Tests:
Offsets only
console.log('In DOM and visible: ' + (!!(box.offsetHeight || box.offsetWidth || box.offsetTop || box.offsetLeft || box.offsetParent) ? 'true' : 'false'));
ComputedStyle only
let style = getComputedStyle(box); console.log('Visible: ' + (style['display'] !== 'none' && style['visibility'] !== 'hidden' && style['opacity'] > 0.1 ? 'true' : 'false'));
Both
console.log('In DOM and visible: ' + (!!(box.offsetHeight || box.offsetWidth || box.offsetTop || box.offsetLeft || box.offsetParent) ? 'true' : 'false')); let style = getComputedStyle(box); console.log('Visible: ' + (style['display'] !== 'none' && style['visibility'] !== 'hidden' && style['opacity'] > 0.1 ? 'true' : 'false'));
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Offsets only
ComputedStyle only
Both
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**Benchmark Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks, comparing different approaches for retrieving an element's visibility in the DOM. The provided benchmark definition json and individual test cases outline three scenarios: 1. **Offsets only**: Checking if the element is visible by verifying its offset properties (top, left, width, height). 2. **ComputedStyle only**: Using the `getComputedStyle()` method to retrieve the element's computed style and checking its visibility. 3. **Both**: Combining both approaches in a single test case. **Options Compared** The three test cases compare different methods for determining an element's visibility: * **Offsets only**: Verifies if the element is visible by checking its offset properties (top, left, width, height). * **ComputedStyle only**: Uses `getComputedStyle()` to retrieve the element's computed style and checks its visibility. * **Both**: Combines both approaches in a single test case. **Pros and Cons** ### Offsets Only * **Pros**: Lightweight and easy to implement. Verifies visibility based on actual offset values, which may be more accurate for certain use cases (e.g., elements with absolute positioning). * **Cons**: May not work correctly for elements with complex layouts or when the element is not actually visible but has an invalid `offsetParent` value. ### ComputedStyle Only * **Pros**: More reliable and accurate, as it considers all styles applied to the element, including pseudo-classes and media queries. Less prone to false positives due to offset-related issues. * **Cons**: Heavier and more computationally expensive compared to offsets only. May not work correctly for certain edge cases or when the `getComputedStyle()` method is not supported. ### Both * **Pros**: Combines the benefits of both approaches, providing a more robust and accurate visibility check while still being relatively lightweight. * **Cons**: More complex implementation and may introduce additional overhead due to the use of two methods in a single test case. **Library and Special JS Features** The benchmark uses the `getComputedStyle()` method, which is part of the DOM API. This method retrieves an element's computed style, including values from CSS rules like `display`, `visibility`, and `opacity`. No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in this benchmark. **Alternatives** Other approaches for determining an element's visibility could include: * **CSSOM Traversal**: Utilizing the CSS Object Model (CSSOM) to traverse the DOM tree and find the relevant styles. * **Layout Engine APIs**: Leveraging APIs from layout engines like Blink or Gecko to determine an element's visibility based on its rendered state. These alternatives may offer different trade-offs in terms of performance, accuracy, and complexity compared to the approaches outlined in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() vs Math.floorfaster test
lodash.round VS toFixed() VS toFixed() and parseFloat vs L.formmatNum
toFixed vs Math.round()12
float vs tofixed (kostian)
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() vs Math.floorfast 0
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?