Benchmark: querySelector2244

HTML Preparation code:

    <div>
        <p>12345</p>
		12345
    </div>

Script Preparation code:

var X = 0;
var A = document.body;
var B = document.body.querySelector("div>p");
var C = A.querySelector("div>p");
var D = A.querySelector("div");
var E = D.querySelector(":scope>p");

Tests:

1
document.body.querySelector("div>p").textContent += X;
2
B.textContent += X;
3
C.textContent += X;
4
E.textContent += X;
5
A.querySelector("div>p").textContent += X;
6
document.body.querySelector("div>p").textContent += X;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1
2
3
4
5
6

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 123 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
1	7594.5 Ops/sec
2	3619.7 Ops/sec
3	2640.2 Ops/sec
4	2176.3 Ops/sec
5	1791.3 Ops/sec
6	1784.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll explain the provided benchmark in detail, including what is tested, options compared, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition represents six test cases that compare the performance of different ways to modify the text content of an element. The tests are designed to measure how fast the browser can execute a specific JavaScript code snippet.

Here's a breakdown of each test case:

1. `document.body.querySelector("div>p").textContent += X;`
2. `B.textContent += X;` (where `B` is the result of `A.querySelector("div>p")`)
3. `C.textContent += X;` (where `C` is the result of `A.querySelector("div")`)
4. `E.textContent += X;` (where `E` is the result of `D.querySelector(":scope>p")`)
5. `A.querySelector("div>p").textContent += X;`
6. `document.body.querySelector("div>p").textContent += X;`

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares six different options:

1. Modifying the text content directly on the element (`E`) using `querySelector` with a scope selector (`:scope`).
2. Using a variable to store the result of `querySelector` and then modifying its text content.
3. Storing the result of `querySelector` in a variable, but not modifying its text content.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Modifying the text content directly on the element (`E`)**
	* Pros: Simple and straightforward way to modify the text content.
	* Cons: May lead to unnecessary computations if the `querySelector` operation is expensive.
2. **Using a variable to store the result of `querySelector` and then modifying its text content (test cases 2, 3, 5)**
	* Pros: Allows for easier modification of the text content without having to requery the element multiple times.
	* Cons: May lead to unnecessary computations if the `querySelector` operation is expensive, or if the variable needs to be updated frequently.
3. **Storing the result of `querySelector` in a variable, but not modifying its text content (test cases 1, 4, 6)**
	* Pros: Avoids unnecessary computations associated with modifying the text content directly on the element.
	* Cons: Requires an additional step to update the text content, which may lead to extra overhead.

**Library and Purpose**

None of the test cases use any specific library, but `querySelector` is a standard JavaScript method for selecting elements by their CSS selectors.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark. All tests follow standard JavaScript syntax.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark assumes that the element being queried has already been parsed and is available in the DOM.
* The `:scope` pseudo-class is a scope selector that refers to the current document's context, making it equivalent to querying the same element as before.
* The use of `textContent += X` instead of `textContent = X + ...` may affect performance since `textContent` is a property that involves some extra work.

**Alternatives**

There are other alternatives to measure the performance of similar operations:

* Using Web APIs like `DOMTokenList` or `CSSOM`
* Implementing custom performance benchmarks using low-level JavaScript
* Using existing benchmarking frameworks like Benchmark.js or js-benchmark

Keep in mind that these alternatives may provide more fine-grained control over the benchmark, but also require more expertise and effort to set up and interpret.

Related benchmarks:

querySelector2244 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 1 vs 2 vs 3 vs 4 vs 5 vs 6

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

1

2

3

4

5

6

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):