Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
innerHTML vs innerText vs textContent123123
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
innerText vs innerHtml vs textContent
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<span id='hello'>Hello, World!</span>
Tests:
innerText
let i = 10; let el = document.querySelector("#hello"); while (i--) { el.innerText = "Goodbye"; }
innerHtml
let i = 10; let el = document.querySelector("#hello"); while (i--) { el.innerHtml = "Goodbye"; }
textContent
let i = 10; let el = document.querySelector("#hello"); while (i--) { el.textContent = "Goodbye"; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
innerText
innerHtml
textContent
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 on MeasureThat.net. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition json represents a simple test case that measures the performance difference between three properties: `innerHTML`, `innerText`, and `textContent` when setting the text content of an HTML element. The code snippet in the "Script Preparation Code" section initializes a variable `i` with value 10, selects an HTML element using `document.querySelector`, and then enters a loop that sets the corresponding property on the element to "Goodbye" for each iteration. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares three options: 1. `innerHTML`: This property sets the HTML content of an element. 2. `innerText`: This property sets the text content of an element without any HTML tags. 3. `textContent`: This property sets the plain text content of an element, including text inside HTML tags. **Pros and Cons** Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons for each option: * `innerHTML`: + Pros: Easy to set up, no need to worry about stripping HTML tags. + Cons: Can be slower due to parsing HTML strings, which can lead to unnecessary processing. + Note: This option is not recommended in production code, as it can lead to security issues and performance bottlenecks. * `innerText`: + Pros: Simple and straightforward, no need to worry about stripping HTML tags. + Cons: Can be slower due to the overhead of iterating over elements to extract text content. + Note: This option is a good choice when you only need to set plain text content. * `textContent`: + Pros: Faster than `innerHTML`, as it doesn't require parsing HTML strings. + Cons: Requires careful handling of HTML tags, as they are not stripped. **Library and Purpose** None mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that these properties are part of the DOM (Document Object Model) API, which is a standard interface for interacting with HTML documents in JavaScript. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There is no special feature or syntax used in this benchmark definition. The code snippets are straightforward and don't utilize any advanced JavaScript features. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternatives to these properties, here are some options: * `outerHTML`: Similar to `innerHTML`, but also sets the outer HTML of an element. * `nodeValue`: A more modern alternative to `innerText`, which is supported by most browsers and provides similar functionality. Overall, this benchmark definition provides a useful comparison between three common ways to set text content in JavaScript. By understanding the pros and cons of each option, developers can make informed decisions when writing code that interacts with HTML documents.
Related benchmarks:
innerText vs textContent + trim (HTML)
innerHTML vs innerText vs textContent1231232
innerHTML vs textContent vs innerText
textContent vs innerHTML vs innerText
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?