Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
jQuery Selector v2
(version: 0)
testing .find vs inline selector
Comparing performance of:
Inline Selector vs Find vs Ignore root
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.1.0/jquery.min.js"></script> <div id="#test-root"><div class="test-child"></div></div>
Tests:
Inline Selector
jQuery('#test-root .test-child').css('border', '1px solid red');
Find
jQuery('#test-root').find('.test-child').css('border', '1px solid red');
Ignore root
jQuery('.test-child').css('border', '1px solid red');
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Inline Selector
Find
Ignore root
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):
I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark is testing the performance of jQuery's selector methods on a simple HTML structure. The test consists of three individual test cases: 1. **Inline Selector**: Tests the performance of using an inline selector (`jQuery('#test-root .test-child').css('border', '1px solid red');`). 2. **Find**: Tests the performance of using the `find()` method (`jQuery('#test-root').find('.test-child').css('border', '1px solid red');`). 3. **Ignore Root**: Tests the performance of ignoring the root element when selecting a descendant (`jQuery('.test-child').css('border', '1px solid red');`). **Library and Purpose** The benchmark uses jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling. The `find()` method is used to select elements within a parent element. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the use of `css()` method is not typically performance-critical, as it's primarily used for setting and getting CSS styles on an element. **Comparison Options** The three test cases compare the performance of different approaches: 1. **Inline Selector**: Uses an inline selector to select the `.test-child` element within the `#test-root` element. 2. **Find**: Uses the `find()` method to select all descendant elements of the `#test-root` element that match the `.test-child` class. 3. **Ignore Root**: Ignores the root element (`#test-root`) and selects only the `.test-child` elements directly. **Pros and Cons** Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach: 1. **Inline Selector**: * Pros: Can be faster due to fewer DOM traversals. * Cons: May not work as expected if the selector is complex or if the element is dynamically added/removed. 2. **Find**: * Pros: More flexible and reliable, as it can find elements even if they're dynamically added or removed. * Cons: May be slower due to more DOM traversals. 3. **Ignore Root**: * Pros: Can be faster when selecting only direct descendants of an element. * Cons: Requires careful consideration of the selector's scope and may not work as expected in certain situations. **Other Alternatives** Other alternatives for similar use cases might include: 1. Using a CSS class selector instead of inline selectors. 2. Using other jQuery methods, such as `closest()` or `siblings()`, to select elements. 3. Implementing custom DOM traversal logic using JavaScript. These alternatives would depend on the specific requirements and constraints of the project.
Related benchmarks:
jQuery Selector
jQuery Selector #2
find vs. direct selection
jQuery Selector v3
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?