Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
test dqw dwqdwqwq
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Simple vs Indexing class
Created:
8 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Simple
for(var i = 0; i < 20; i++){ document.querySelectorAll('.test.abc.def'); }
Indexing class
class Find { constructor(){ this.queryIndexes = {}; this.query = this.query.bind(this); /* { '.something': node } */ } query(q){ return this.queryIndexes[q] || (this.queryIndexes[q] = document.querySelectorAll(q)); } } const Finder = new Find(); for(var i = 0; i < 20; i++){ Finder.query('.test.abc.def'); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Simple
Indexing class
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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks. **What is being tested?** The benchmark is testing two different approaches for retrieving elements from an HTML document using `document.querySelectorAll()`. The first test case, "Simple", uses a straightforward approach with a simple selector. The second test case, "Indexing class", uses an object-based approach with a class that stores the query indexes. **Options compared** The benchmark is comparing two different approaches: 1. **Simple Selector**: This approach uses a simple string-based selector to retrieve elements from the document. It's a straightforward and efficient way to select elements, but it may not be as flexible or powerful as other methods. 2. **Indexing class**: This approach uses an object-based class that stores the query indexes. The class has a `query` method that takes a selector string as an argument and returns a list of matching elements. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons for each approach: **Simple Selector** Pros: * Easy to implement and understand * Fast execution times Cons: * Limited flexibility and power compared to other methods * May not handle complex or dynamic selectors well **Indexing class** Pros: * Highly flexible and powerful * Can handle complex or dynamic selectors * Allows for caching of query results Cons: * More complex implementation and understanding required * May have overhead due to object creation and method calls **Other considerations** The benchmark also considers the impact of different JavaScript features, such as `this` keyword binding (used in the "Indexing class" test case). In this specific case, the `bind()` method is used to create a new bound function for the `query` method. This can affect performance and readability. **Library usage** There is no explicit library usage mentioned in the benchmark definitions or results. However, it's worth noting that the "Indexing class" test case uses a custom object-based approach, which may be influenced by libraries like Lodash or underscore.js. **Special JS features** The benchmark highlights the use of the `this` keyword binding (bind()) method, which is a JavaScript feature used to create new bound functions. This can affect performance and readability. In summary, the benchmark tests two different approaches for retrieving elements from an HTML document using `document.querySelectorAll()`, comparing the pros and cons of each approach. The "Indexing class" test case uses an object-based approach with caching capabilities, while the "Simple" test case uses a straightforward string-based selector.
Related benchmarks:
Quake InvertSqrt
testt3tt3
testtestset
qdqsdqsdqsdsdqsd
qsdqdqsdsqdqsd
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?