Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Body vs Tagname
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Attr vs querySelector
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Attr
const body = document.body; body.style.backgroundColor = '#2a2a2a';
querySelector
const body = document.querySelector('body'); body.style.backgroundColor = '#2a2a2a';
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Attr
querySelector
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 benchmark and its test cases. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches when setting the background color of an HTML element: by using a `document.body` reference (referred to as "Attr") versus by using `document.querySelector('body')`. **Test Cases** There are two individual test cases: 1. **"Attr"`**: This test case uses a direct reference to `document.body`, which is stored in the `const body = document.body;` variable. The code then sets the background color of this element. 2. **"querySelector"`**: This test case uses `document.querySelector('body')` to select the `<body>` element, which returns an HTMLCollection containing a single element, the `<body>`. The code then sets the background color of this element. **Performance Comparison** The benchmark measures how many times each approach executes per second. In other words, it measures how fast each test case can complete. **Pros and Cons:** * **"Attr"` (Direct Reference): + Pros: - Typically faster because it's a direct property access. - Less overhead due to the `querySelector` method. + Cons: - May not work in all situations, like when using CSS selectors or attribute selectors. * **"querySelector"` (Using `document.querySelector`): + Pros: - Works in most situations, including with CSS selectors and attribute selectors. - Can be useful for selecting elements that don't exist yet. + Cons: - Typically slower due to the overhead of the `querySelector` method. **Library and Special JS Features** In this benchmark, there are no libraries or special JavaScript features being used. The code is straightforward and only uses standard JavaScript constructs. **Other Alternatives** If you wanted to test other approaches for setting the background color, you might consider: * Using `document.getElementById('body')` instead of `document.querySelector('body')`. * Using a CSS selector like `body { /* styles */ }` instead of modifying the element directly. * Using `requestAnimationFrame()` or `setTimeout()` to schedule the color change. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The benchmark preparation code is not provided, but based on the test cases, it's likely that the script sets up a basic HTML document with a `<body>` element and runs each test case repeatedly. The actual implementation would depend on the specific requirements of the benchmark. Overall, this benchmark provides a simple way to compare the performance of two common approaches for setting the background color of an HTML element.
Related benchmarks:
inline functions vs hoisted
Lodash get vs isNil
Lodash.get vs Property dot notation bmt
function.call() vs function()
Tom test 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?