Benchmark: TestTestTest - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

function testA(){
	var div = document.createElement('div');
	div.innerText = 'Hello world';

	return div;
}

function testB(){
	var tmp = document.createElement('div');
  var html = '<div>Hello world</div>';
  
  tmp.innerHTML = html;
  
	return tmp.firstChild;
}

var testCData = testA();
function testC(){
	return testCData.cloneNode(true);
}

Tests:

A
testA();
B
testB();
C
testC();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
A
B
C

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 its options.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark, specifically designed to compare the performance of three different approaches: creating an HTML element directly (Test A), using the `innerHTML` property to create the content (Test B), and cloning a node with `cloneNode(true)` method (Test C).

**Options Compared**

1. **Creating an HTML Element Directly**: In Test A, an HTML element is created using the `document.createElement()` method and its `innerText` property is set.
2. **Using `innerHTML` Property**: In Test B, an HTML string is used to create a temporary string with the desired content, which is then assigned to the `innerHTML` property of another element (`tmp`). The resulting first child of this new element is returned.
3. **Cloning a Node**: In Test C, a cloned node is created by calling the `cloneNode(true)` method on the result of Test A.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **Creating an HTML Element Directly (Test A)**:
    *   Pros: More control over the element's properties and behavior.
    *   Cons: May lead to performance overhead due to additional steps in the DOM tree.
*   **Using `innerHTML` Property (Test B)**:
    *   Pros: Simpler and more concise code, but may introduce security risks if the HTML string is not sanitized.
    *   Cons: Less control over element properties and behavior.
*   **Cloning a Node (Test C)**:
    *   Pros: More efficient than creating an entirely new element, as it only copies the necessary parts of the original node.
    *   Cons: May lead to unexpected side effects if not used carefully.

**Library Usage**

The `cloneNode` method is a part of the DOM API and does not require any specific library. It's a built-in JavaScript function that creates a deep copy of an existing node.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes explicitly mentioned in this benchmark, aside from the use of `innerHTML`, which can be considered as using some internal functionality, but its usage is not particularly unique for the scope of this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

TestTestTest (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: A vs B vs C

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

A

B

C

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):