Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
textContent vs innerText (read)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
textContent vs innerText
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var a = document.createElement('a'); a.textContent = "Text";
Tests:
textContent
a.textContent;
innerText
a.innerText;
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
textContent
innerText
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):
I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in this JavaScript benchmark. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: accessing the `textContent` property and accessing the `innerText` property of an HTML element. **Options Compared** Two options are compared: 1. **textContent**: This approach accesses the text content of an HTML element using the `textContent` property. 2. **innerText**: This approach accesses the inner text of an HTML element using the `innerText` property (note: in JavaScript, there is no built-in `innerText` property; it's actually a proprietary feature of some browsers, which we'll discuss later). **Pros and Cons** **textContent**: This approach is more widely supported across different browsers and versions. It's also generally considered a better practice for accessing the text content of an element. * Pros: + Wider browser support + More consistent behavior across browsers * Cons: + May not be as efficient as the alternative approach **innerText**: This approach is specific to some browsers (e.g., Internet Explorer, Opera) and may not work in other browsers or versions. * Pros: + May be more efficient in certain browsers * Cons: + Limited browser support + Not a standard JavaScript feature **Library and Purpose** None of the libraries are mentioned in this benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some libraries (e.g., jQuery) may provide alternative ways to access element text content. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark definition. Both approaches use standard JavaScript property access. **Other Alternatives** If you wanted to compare other approaches, here are a few alternatives: * Using `innerHTML` instead of `textContent`: This approach would be less efficient and more prone to security issues due to the potential for XSS attacks. * Using `outerHTML` instead of `textContent`: Similar to using `innerHTML`, this approach would also be less efficient and more prone to security issues. * Comparing the performance of different element selection methods (e.g., `document.querySelector()`, `document.getElementById()`): This would require modifying the benchmark definition to include these approaches. Keep in mind that the specific alternatives you'd want to test depend on your use case and goals.
Related benchmarks:
createTextNode vs textContent vs innerText
innerText vs textContent + trim
innerText vs textContent + trim (HTML)
createTextNode vs textContent vs innerText vs innerHTML (for reading)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?