Benchmark: closest() vs parent().parent() + hasClass()

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div class="tuttifrutti" >
 	<div class="gasodas">
  		<div class="banga">
   			<div class="dayum">
    			<div class="dada">
      				<div id="phew" class="potat">boop</div>
    			</div>
   			</div>
  		</div>
 	</div>
</div>

Script Preparation code:

var yes = $('phew');

Tests:

closest
yes.closest('.my-fancy-class');
parents + hasClass
yes.parent().parent().hasClass('my-fancy-class');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
closest
parents + hasClass

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:142.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/142.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 142 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

closest

9.2M/s

parents + hasClass

2.7M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ closest	9,195,675 Ops/sec
parents + hasClass	2,711,164 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases, explaining what's being tested, the pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `closest()` vs `parent().parent() + hasClass()` benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to check if an element exists in a DOM tree:

1. `closest()`: A jQuery method that finds the closest ancestor matching the given selector.
2. `parent().parent().hasClass('my-fancy-class')`: A chain of methods that first finds the parent of the current element, then finds its parent again ( effectively going up two levels), and finally checks if the resulting element has a specific class (`my-fancy-class`).

**Pros and Cons:**

* `closest()`:
	+ Pros:
		- More efficient as it only traverses the DOM tree until it finds a matching ancestor.
		- Often faster, especially for elements with multiple parents.
	+ Cons:
		- May not work correctly if the element has no parent or if the parent is not in the DOM tree.
* `parent().parent().hasClass('my-fancy-class')`:
	+ Pros:
		- Works even if the element has no parent, as it will simply return false.
		- Can be useful when working with elements that don't have a parent, like document roots or child elements of other elements' children.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires two additional traversals through the DOM tree, making it generally slower than `closest()`.
		- May cause performance issues for deeply nested elements.

**Other Considerations:**

* The benchmark uses jQuery's `$` function to select and manipulate elements. This adds an overhead due to the library's complexity.
* The use of `hasClass()` with a specific class (`my-fancy-class`) is likely used here as a placeholder. In a real-world scenario, you would typically use a more meaningful class name.

**Test Case Analysis**

The test cases provided are:

1. `closest()`: This test case uses the `closest()` method to find an element matching a specific selector.
2. `parents + hasClass`: This test case uses the chain of methods `parent().parent().hasClass('my-fancy-class')` to achieve the same result as the first test case.

**Library:**

The `hasClass()` function is part of jQuery's utility library. Its purpose is to check if an element has a specific class attached to it.

**Special JavaScript Features/Syntax:**

* There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark beyond standard JavaScript and jQuery.
* However, the use of `$` (the dollar sign) as a function reference is a common convention in jQuery code. This notation allows jQuery to execute the provided callback function when the element is found.

**Alternatives:**

If you need an alternative implementation, consider using:

1. `element.contains()` for a similar purpose to `closest()`, but without the chaining overhead.
2. A custom solution that only traverses the DOM tree up to a certain depth or using a more efficient algorithm like CSS selector matching.
3. Other libraries or frameworks that provide similar functionality, such as React's `useRef` and `useState` hooks for element management.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might have different performance characteristics, so it's essential to test them thoroughly before making a decision.

closest() vs parent().parent() + hasClass() (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Checking if double parent() + hasClass() validation is really faster than just going for closest().

Comparing performance of: `closest vs parents + hasClass`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

closest

parents + hasClass

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

closest() vs parent().parent() + hasClass() (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Checking if double parent() + hasClass() validation is really faster than just going for closest().

Comparing performance of: closest vs parents + hasClass

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

closest

parents + hasClass

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `closest vs parents + hasClass`