Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
createElement("span") vs cloneNode()
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
createElement("span") vs cloneNode()
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
createElement("span")
var list = [], n = 0; while(true) { n++; var span = document.createElement("span"); span.className = "random class name"; span.style.all = "unset"; list.push(span); if(n===100000) break; }
cloneNode()
var list = [], n = 0, node = document.createElement("span"); node.className = "random class name"; node.style.all = "unset"; while(true) { n++; var span = node.cloneNode(); list.push(span); 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("span")
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 Description** The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches: creating an HTML element using `document.createElement()` versus cloning an existing element using `cloneNode()`. **Test Case Options** There are two test cases: 1. **createElement("span")**: This approach creates a new `<span>` element from scratch. 2. **cloneNode()**: This approach clones an already existing element (in this case, a newly created `<span>` element) to create a new copy of it. **Pros and Cons** * **createElement("span")**: + Pros: Creates a new, distinct HTML element, which can be beneficial in scenarios where you need to manipulate the element's attributes or styles independently. + Cons: Requires more resources (CPU and memory) since a new element is created from scratch, which can lead to slower performance for large numbers of elements. * **cloneNode()**: + Pros: Reuses an existing element, reducing the overhead of creating a new one. This approach is beneficial when you need to create multiple copies of the same element with the same attributes and styles. + Cons: Creates a shallow copy of the original element, which means any changes made to the cloned element will also affect the original. Also, if the original element has a large number of children or complex structure, cloning it can be slower than creating a new one. **Library and Purpose** In this benchmark, `document` is used as a global object, which provides access to various DOM (Document Object Model) methods and properties. The `createElement()` method creates a new HTML element, while the `cloneNode()` method creates a shallow copy of an existing element. **Special JavaScript Feature or Syntax** There are no special features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that modern JavaScript engines have various optimizations and techniques to improve performance, such as just-in-time (JIT) compilation, caching, and speculative execution. **Other Alternatives** If you need to compare the performance of different HTML element creation approaches, you can consider other options: * Using `HTMLFactory.create()` (Chrome-specific) * Creating elements using a library like React or Angular * Comparing the performance of server-side rendering versus client-side rendering Keep in mind that these alternatives may have their own trade-offs and complexities, and might not be directly comparable to the `createElement()` and `cloneNode()` methods used in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
createElement vs cloneNode v3
createElement vs cloneNode vs cloneNode-lite
createElement vs deep cloneNode vs cloneNode
cloneNode vs createElement
Create versus clone element
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?