Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
createElement vs cloneNode23
(version: 0)
Faster way to create new dom elements before insertion
Comparing performance of:
createElement vs cloneNode
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
createElement
var list = [], n = 0; while(true) { n++; list.push(document.createElement('div')); if(n===100000) break; }
cloneNode
var list = [], n = 0, node = document.createElement('div'); while(true) { n++; //list.push(node.cloneNode(true)); if(n===100000) break; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
createElement
cloneNode
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and its test cases. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark, named "createElement vs cloneNode23", compares two approaches to create new DOM elements: `document.createElement` (createElement) and `cloneNode`. The goal is to determine which approach is faster for creating a large number of DOM elements before insertion. **Options Compared** The two options being compared are: 1. **`document.createElement`**: This method creates a new DOM element from scratch, specifying the element type as an argument. 2. **`cloneNode`**: This method creates a deep copy of an existing node, including its children. Although not directly applicable to creating new elements, it can be used to create multiple clones of an existing element. **Pros and Cons** * **`document.createElement`**: * Pros: Faster and more efficient for creating new elements. * Cons: Requires specifying the element type as an argument, which may be less convenient in some cases. * **`cloneNode`**: * Pros: More flexible, as it can create multiple copies of an existing element. * Cons: Slower and more resource-intensive compared to `createElement`. **Library and Special JS Features** The provided benchmark code does not use any specific JavaScript libraries. However, the use of `cloneNode` is relevant because of its ability to create deep copies of nodes. **Test Case Explanation** The two test cases are identical, but with slight differences: * The first test case uses a `while` loop to push multiple elements onto an array using `document.createElement`. * The second test case creates a single element using `document.createElement`, then clones it repeatedly using `cloneNode`. **Benchmark Preparation Code and HTML Preparation Code** The benchmark preparation code is empty (`"Script Preparation Code": null, "Html Preparation Code": null`), indicating that no specific setup or initialization is required for the tests. This is likely because the test cases are self-contained and focus on comparing the performance of `createElement` and `cloneNode`. **Other Alternatives** Alternative approaches to create new DOM elements could include: * **`documentFragment`**: A fragment node that can be used to create multiple elements without affecting the normal document flow. * **`div` element with an invisible child**: Creating a `div` element with an invisible child (e.g., an empty string or null) to serve as a container for other elements. However, these alternatives may not directly compare to the basic `createElement` and `cloneNode` approaches.
Related benchmarks:
createElement vs cloneNode(false)
createElement vs cloneNode()
createElement vs cloneNode v3
createElement vs cloneNode vs cloneNode-lite
createElement vs deep cloneNode vs cloneNode
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?