Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
textContent on online vs offline DOM node
(version: 2)
Comparing performance of:
online vs offline
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<div id="online"></div> <div id="offline" style="display: none"></div>
Tests:
online
online.textContent = 'Test';
offline
offline.textContent = 'Test';
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
online
offline
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):
The provided benchmark measures the performance of JavaScript code that accesses text content from DOM nodes, both online and offline. **Options Compared:** The benchmark compares two approaches: 1. **Online**: Accessing `textContent` on an element with a valid connection to the internet (i.e., the browser can make requests). 2. **Offline**: Accessing `textContent` on an element without a valid connection to the internet (i.e., the browser cannot make requests). **Pros and Cons of Each Approach:** * **Online (Valid Connection)**: + Pros: - Can take advantage of caching, which can reduce network latency. - May be faster due to reduced overhead from making an HTTP request. + Cons: - Requires a valid internet connection, which may not always be available or stable. * **Offline (No Connection)**: + Pros: - Can execute faster since there's no network overhead. - Reduces the risk of network errors and timeouts. + Cons: - May require additional memory to cache resources, which can increase memory usage. **Library Usage:** The benchmark uses the `textContent` property directly on DOM elements, without referencing any specific libraries. However, it's worth noting that some browsers may have optimized implementations for `textContent`, such as WebKit's `getAttribute()` method or Mozilla's `textContent` optimization. **Special JS Feature/Syntax:** None are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. However, if you're interested in testing other JavaScript features or syntax, MeasureThat.net provides a wide range of benchmarks covering various aspects of the language and browser implementation. **Other Alternatives:** If you'd like to test similar scenarios, you can explore other benchmarks on MeasureThat.net, such as: * Measuring the performance of DOM manipulation (e.g., inserting, removing, or appending elements). * Comparing the performance of different string concatenation techniques. * Testing the impact of various caching strategies on JavaScript execution time. Keep in mind that these alternatives might have slightly different benchmark definitions and test cases, so be sure to review each one carefully before running your tests.
Related benchmarks:
jQuery 2.2.0 vs Vanilla JS SetText Speed Test
innerText vs textContent + trim (HTML)
jquery text vs js textContent
textContent vs. innerText vs. nodeValue
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?