Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
window.getComputedStyle vs. getBoundingClientRect width calculation
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
getComputedStyle vs getBoundingClientRect
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<div id="foo">This is a text</div>
Tests:
getComputedStyle
var i = 5000; while (i--) { checkDisplay('foo'); } function checkDisplay(id) { return window.getComputedStyle(document.getElementById(id), null).getPropertyValue("width"); }
getBoundingClientRect
var i = 5000; while (i--) { checkDisplay('foo'); } function checkDisplay(id) { return document.getElementById(id).getBoundingClientRect().width; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
getComputedStyle
getBoundingClientRect
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 break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Overview** The benchmark compares two approaches to calculate the width of an HTML element: `window.getComputedStyle` and `document.getElementById().getBoundingClientRect().width`. **Test Cases** There are two test cases: 1. **getComputedStyle**: This test case uses a loop to repeatedly call `checkDisplay('foo')`, where `checkDisplay` function calculates the width of the HTML element with id "foo" using `window.getComputedStyle`. 2. **getBoundingClientRect**: This test case uses a similar approach as the first one, but instead of using `window.getComputedStyle`, it directly accesses the `getBoundingClientRect()` method on the `document.getElementById('foo')`. **Library and Purpose** In both test cases, the `checkDisplay` function is not a built-in JavaScript library or syntax. It's a custom function created to measure the performance difference between these two approaches. However, `document.getElementById` and `window.getComputedStyle` are built-in JavaScript APIs that interact with the DOM (Document Object Model). **Special JS Features/Syntax** There isn't any specific special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. The code only relies on standard JavaScript functionality. **Pros and Cons of Approaches** Here's a brief summary of each approach: 1. **getComputedStyle**: * Pros: More accurate, as it takes into account the element's layout and box model. * Cons: Can be slower due to the need to fetch additional metadata from the browser. 2. **getBoundingClientRect**: * Pros: Faster, as it provides a more direct access to the element's size and position. * Cons: May not provide accurate results for elements with complex layouts or box models. **Other Alternatives** If you want to compare these two approaches in different scenarios, you could also consider using other methods: 1. **Client-side CSSOM**: Instead of `getComputedStyle`, you could use the Client-side CSS Object Model (CSSOM) API to access the element's styles. 2. **Server-side rendering**: You could measure the performance difference between these approaches when rendered on the server, rather than client-side. Keep in mind that each approach has its own trade-offs and may not be suitable for all scenarios.
Related benchmarks:
toFixed vs Math.round() - result as a number
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() asd
Math.round()
parseFloat(toFixed) vs Math.round()
inline svg vs use
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?