Benchmark: Corrected DOM manipulation vs innerhtml

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="root"></div>

Tests:

innerHTML
let root = document.querySelector('#root') id = '4/4b809ca8-b600-a286-62b6-83a6a5fc4310'; style = "left: 0px; top: 0px; white-space: nowrap;"; root.innerHTML = `<div id=${id} style=${style}>0</div>`; root.innerHTML = ''
DOM manipulation
let root = document.querySelector('#root') let itemBox = document.createElement('div') itemBox.id = "4/4b809ca8-b600-a286-62b6-83a6a5fc4310" itemBox.style = "left: 0px; top: 0px; white-space: nowrap;" itemBox.innerHTML = `0` root.appendChild(itemBox) root.removeChild(itemBox)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
innerHTML
DOM manipulation

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined by two test cases: `innerHTML` and `DOM manipulation`. The benchmark measures the performance difference between using `innerHTML` to set the content of an HTML element versus creating a new DOM node, manipulating its attributes, and appending it to the original element.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **`innerHTML`**: This method sets the inner HTML of an element by replacing all existing child nodes with new content.
2. **DOM manipulation**: This approach creates a new DOM node, sets its attributes (e.g., `id`, `style`), and appends it to the original element.

**Pros and Cons**

* **`innerHTML`**:
	+ Pros: Simple, easy to use, and often faster since it can bypass some browser optimizations.
	+ Cons: Can lead to performance issues if used excessively or with complex content, as it may not be optimized for frequent changes.
* **DOM manipulation**:
	+ Pros: Provides more control over the DOM tree and allows for better optimization of frequently changing elements.
	+ Cons: More verbose and requires understanding of DOM node creation, attribute setting, and appending.

In general, `innerHTML` is a good choice when you need to set simple content, while DOM manipulation is preferred when you require more complex manipulations or need fine-grained control over the DOM tree.

**Library/Libraries**

None are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some browsers have optimized their inner HTML handling, which can lead to performance differences between `innerHTML` and DOM manipulation approaches.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The benchmark uses:

* **Template literals**: Used in the `innerHTML` test case to set the content of the element.
* **Template literals are not used in the "DOM manipulation" approach. Instead, string concatenation (`+`) is used to create the HTML string.

Other than template literals and string concatenation, the benchmark code uses standard JavaScript features.

**Alternatives**

Other approaches to achieve similar results could be:

1. Using a DOM library like jQuery or a lightweight alternative.
2. Creating a virtual DOM and synchronously updating it when necessary.
3. Utilizing browser-specific APIs (e.g., WebAssembly, Canvas) for complex computations.

However, these alternatives might not provide the same level of control over the DOM tree as DOM manipulation or `innerHTML` approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Corrected DOM manipulation vs innerhtml (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: innerHTML vs DOM manipulation

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

innerHTML

DOM manipulation

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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