Benchmark: innerText vs createTextNode asd

Script Preparation code:

var data = [...Array(1000)].map( () => {
  return document.createElement( 'div' );
} );

Tests:

innerText
data.forEach( ( div ) => { div.innerText = 'Test'; } );
createTextNode
data.forEach( ( div ) => { div.append( document.createTextNode( 'Test' ) ); } );

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
innerText
createTextNode

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 Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that defines two test cases:

1. `innerText`: This test case measures the time it takes to set the text content of an element using the `innerText` property.
2. `createTextNode`: This test case measures the time it takes to create and append a new text node to an element using the `createTextNode` method.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates an array of 1000 HTML elements (specifically, `div` elements) and assigns them to a variable called `data`. The intention is to use these elements in the test cases.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no html preparation code provided, which means that the benchmark assumes that the HTML structure for the test elements has already been set up elsewhere.

**Options being compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. Using the `innerText` property to set text content.
2. Creating a new text node using the `createTextNode` method and appending it to an element.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

Using `innerText` has some advantages:

* It's likely to be faster, as it involves setting the text content directly on the element without creating a separate text node.
* However, it may not be suitable for all use cases, such as when you need to manipulate the text content programmatically.

Creating a new text node using `createTextNode` has some advantages:

* It provides more control over the text content, as you can manipulate the node's text content and attributes independently of the element.
* However, it may be slower than using `innerText`, especially for simple cases where only a small amount of text needs to be updated.

**Library/JS feature used**

There is no specific library or JavaScript feature being used in this benchmark. The benchmark assumes that the JavaScript engine and browser being tested support the `innerText` property and the `createTextNode` method.

However, it's worth noting that some older browsers may not support these features natively, which could affect the benchmark results.

**Special JS feature**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being used in this benchmark. The test cases are straightforward and rely on standard JavaScript constructs.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to setting text content, here are a few options:

1. Using a templating engine like Handlebars or Mustache to render dynamic templates.
2. Creating a custom element that renders its own text content using the `template` attribute.
3. Using a library like React or Angular to manage the text content of an element.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional overhead, dependencies, and complexity compared to using `innerText` or `createTextNode`.

Related benchmarks:

innerText vs createTextNode asd (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: innerText vs createTextNode

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

innerText

createTextNode

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):