Benchmark: Node.nodeValue vs textNode.data vs textcontent

Script Preparation code:

var node = document.createTextNode(' ');
var i = 10000;

Tests:

Node.nodeValue
while(i){ node.nodeValue = i; i-- }
node.data
while(i){ node.data = i; i-- }
textContent
while(i){ node.textContent = i; i-- }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Node.nodeValue
node.data
textContent

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.

Measuring JavaScript performance is a crucial aspect of web development, and tools like MeasureThat.net help developers optimize their code for better performance.

**What's being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test that compares the performance of three different ways to access the value of a `textNode` or an empty string in JavaScript:

1. **nodeValue**: This property is used to access the value of a `Document.createTextNode()` object, which returns the text content of the node.
2. **data**: This property is also used to access the value of a `Document.createTextNode()` object, similar to `nodeValue`, but it's not as widely supported.
3. **textContent**: This property is used to access the value of an HTML element's text content.

**Options being compared**

The benchmark test compares the performance of these three approaches:

* **nodeValue**
* **data** (which is less commonly used)
* **textContent** (the most modern and widely supported approach)

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **nodeValue**: It's a widely supported property, but it might be slower than other approaches due to its inherent nature.
2. **data**: This property is less commonly used, which means there may be fewer optimizations for it in browsers and JavaScript engines. However, it could potentially offer faster execution times due to caching or optimization by the engine.
3. **textContent**: It's a relatively modern property that offers better performance compared to `nodeValue`. However, it might have slightly higher overhead due to its newer nature.

**Library and Purpose:**

None of these options use any specific library; they're all native JavaScript properties or syntax features.

**Special JS feature:**

There is no special JavaScript feature being used in this benchmark. It's purely about comparing the performance of different ways to access text node values.

**Other alternatives:**

If you were to add more variations to this benchmark, some potential alternatives could include:

* Using `innerHTML` or `outerHTML` properties instead of `nodeValue`, `data`, and `textContent`.
* Adding more iterations or complexity to the benchmark code.
* Comparing performance across different browsers, engines, or platforms.

Keep in mind that these additional variations would depend on your specific use case and goals for the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Node.nodeValue vs textNode.data vs textcontent (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Node.nodeValue vs node.data vs textContent

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Node.nodeValue

node.data

textContent

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):