Benchmark: set element.style.cursor

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="foo"></div>

Tests:

naive
var element = document.getElementById("foo"); var i = 100000; while (i--) { element.style.cursor = "default"; }
smart
var element = document.getElementById("foo"); var i = 100000; while (i--) { if(element.style.cursor !== "default") element.style.cursor = "default"; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
naive
smart

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 explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is testing two approaches to setting the `cursor` style property on an HTML element: a naive approach and a smart approach. The goal is to measure which approach is faster.

**Naive Approach**

In the naive approach, the code directly sets the `cursor` style property without checking if it's already set:
```javascript
var element = document.getElementById("foo");
var i = 100000;
while (i--) {
    element.style.cursor = "default";
}
```
This approach is straightforward and easy to understand. However, it may be inefficient because it sets the `cursor` style property repeatedly, even if the value hasn't changed.

**Smart Approach**

In the smart approach, the code checks if the `cursor` style property is already set before setting it:
```javascript
var element = document.getElementById("foo");
var i = 100000;
while (i--) {
    if (element.style.cursor !== "default") element.style.cursor = "default";
}
```
This approach may seem similar to the naive approach, but the key difference lies in the `if` statement. The smart approach checks if the property is already set and only sets it if it's not. This can be faster because it reduces unnecessary assignments.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Naive Approach:**
	+ Pros:
		- Easy to understand and implement
	- Cons:
		- May be inefficient due to repeated assignments
* **Smart Approach:**
	+ Pros:
		- More efficient because it reduces unnecessary assignments
	+ Cons:
		- May require more complex logic (i.e., the `if` statement)

**Library**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, the code uses the Document Object Model (DOM) to interact with HTML elements.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None are explicitly mentioned.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to write this benchmark from scratch, here's a simple example using Node.js and the `benchmark` library:
```javascript
const benchmark = require('benchmark');

// Naive approach
function naive() {
    const element = document.getElementById("foo");
    let i = 100000;
    while (i--) {
        element.style.cursor = "default";
    }
}

// Smart approach
function smart() {
    const element = document.getElementById("foo");
    let i = 100000;
    while (i--) {
        if (element.style.cursor !== "default") element.style.cursor = "default";
    }
}

const suite = new benchmark.Suite();

suite.add('naive', function() { naive(); });
suite.add('smart', function() { smart(); });

suite.on('cycle', function(event) {
    console.log(String(event.target));
});

suite.run();
```
Keep in mind that this is a simplified example and might not capture all the nuances of the original benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

set element.style.cursor (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: naive vs smart

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

naive

smart

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):