Benchmark: no-translate2 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="wpadminbar">
  <div>
    <p>TEST</p>
  	<div>
    	<div id="test">TEST 2</div>
    </div>
  </div>
</div>

<script>
        Benchmark.prototype.setup = function() {
			const node = document.getElementById('test');
  };
</script>

Tests:

all
if (!!node.closest) { let hasNoTranslate, closestNoTranslate; switch (true) { case node.closest('[translate="no"]') !== null: hasNoTranslate = true; closestNoTranslate = node.closest('[translate="no"]'); break case node.closest('.notranslate') !== null: hasNoTranslate = true; closestNoTranslate = node.closest('.notranslate'); break case node.closest('.skiptranslate') !== null: hasNoTranslate = true; closestNoTranslate = node.closest('.skiptranslate'); break case node.closest('#wpadminbar') !== null: hasNoTranslate = true; closestNoTranslate = node.closest('#wpadminbar'); break default: hasNoTranslate = false; } if (!hasNoTranslate) { return false; } const closestYesTranslate = node.closest('[translate="yes"]'); if (closestYesTranslate) { return closestYesTranslate.contains(closestNoTranslate); } }
no-translate
if (!!node.closest) { const closestNoTranslate = node.closest('[translate="no"]'); if (!closestNoTranslate) { return false; } const closestYesTranslate = node.closest('[translate="yes"]'); if (closestYesTranslate) { return closestYesTranslate.contains(closestNoTranslate); } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
all
no-translate

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.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark we'll analyze is the "no-translate2" benchmark, which involves comparing different approaches to checking for the presence of an element with a specific attribute.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is empty, indicating that no additional setup or initialization is required before running the benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition JSON represents two test cases:

1. **Test Case 1: "all"**
This test case checks if the `closest` method returns an element with a specific attribute (`translate="no"`). It uses a switch statement to handle different cases based on the presence of this attribute in the DOM.
2. **Test Case 2: "no-translate"**
This test case is similar to Test Case 1, but it only checks for the presence of elements with `translate="no"` and skips the switch statement.

**Libraries Used**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition JSON. However, it appears that the `closest` method is being used, which is a part of the jQuery library (specifically, jQuery's CSS selector functionality).

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The only special feature in this benchmark is the use of the `closest` method and the `translate` attribute on elements. The `closest` method returns the first ancestor element that matches the specified CSS selector, which can be useful for navigating the DOM.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare different approaches to checking for the presence of an element with a specific attribute:

1. **Test Case 1: "all"**
	* Uses a switch statement to handle multiple cases.
	* Checks for the presence of elements with `translate="no"` and their descendants that also have this attribute.
2. **Test Case 2: "no-translate"**
	* Simplifies Test Case 1 by removing the switch statement.
	* Still checks for the presence of elements with `translate="no"`.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

**Test Case 1: "all"**

Pros:

* Handles multiple cases using a switch statement, making it more robust.
* Checks for descendants that also have the `translate` attribute.

Cons:

* Can be slower due to the overhead of the switch statement.
* More complex codebase.

**Test Case 2: "no-translate"**

Pros:

* Simplified codebase with fewer lines.
* Faster execution speed.

Cons:

* Only checks for the presence of elements with `translate="no"` without considering their descendants.

**Other Considerations**

When running this benchmark, it's essential to consider the following factors:

* The DOM structure and complexity can affect the performance of these tests.
* The use of `closest` method can lead to increased overhead due to the number of ancestor nodes that need to be traversed.
* The presence of other attributes or CSS classes on elements can impact the performance of this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches, here are a few options:

1. Use a different attribute, such as `data-attribute`, which may be faster to check.
2. Implement a custom function to traverse the DOM and find elements with a specific attribute.
3. Use a library like Lodash or Ramda, which provide functional programming utilities that can simplify this type of benchmark.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional overhead or complexity, so it's essential to weigh the trade-offs when choosing an approach.

Related benchmarks:

no-translate2 (version: 0)

no-translate2

Comparing performance of: all vs no-translate

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

all

no-translate

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):