Benchmark: JQuery new div element with class - 1k reps (with prototype.join2)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>

Tests:

JQuery - direct + class
var list = [], n = 0; var newDiv = function(){ return $('<div class="test">'); } while(true) { n++; list.push(newDiv()); if(n===1000) break; }
JQuery - cloneNode + class
var list = [], n = 0, node = document.createElement('div'); var newDiv = function(){ var newNode = node.cloneNode(false); newNode.className = [].slice.call(arguments).join(' '); return $(newNode); } while(true) { n++; list.push(newDiv("test")); if(n===1000) break; }
prototype.join
var list = [], n = 0, node = document.createElement('div'); var newDiv = function (classname) { var newNode = node.cloneNode(false); if (classname !== void 0) newNode.className = Array.prototype.join.call(arguments, " "); return $(newNode); } while(true) { n++; list.push(newDiv("test")); if(n===1000) break; }
forcycle
var list = [], n = 0, node = document.createElement('div'); var newDiv = function (classname) { var newNode = node.cloneNode(false); if (classname !== void 0) { var args = new Array(arguments.length); for (var i = 0, ii = arguments.length; i < ii; i++) { args[i] = arguments[i]; } newNode.className = args.join(' '); } return $(newNode); } while(true) { n++; list.push(newDiv("test")); if(n===1000) break; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JQuery - direct + class
JQuery - cloneNode + class
prototype.join
forcycle

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; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 115 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JQuery - direct + class	120.1 Ops/sec
JQuery - cloneNode + class	1136.5 Ops/sec
prototype.join	921.9 Ops/sec
forcycle	1132.2 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring JavaScript performance is an essential task for any developer or performance enthusiast.

**Benchmark Explanation**

The provided benchmark measures the performance of different approaches to creating new DOM elements using jQuery, specifically when setting a class attribute. The four test cases differ in their approach:

1. **JQuery - direct + class**: This approach creates a new DOM element directly using jQuery's ` $('<div class="test">')` method and then sets the class attribute using `addClass('test')`.
2. **JQuery - cloneNode + class**: This approach creates a new DOM element by cloning an existing element (`document.createElement('div')`) and then sets the class attribute using `cloneNode(false)` and `className = 'test'`.
3. **prototype.join**: This approach uses a custom `join` function on the prototype of jQuery to concatenate class names, which is not a standard jQuery method.
4. **forcycle**: This approach creates a new DOM element by cloning an existing element (`document.createElement('div')`) and then sets the class attribute using `cloneNode(false)` and a custom `join` function.

**Options Comparison**

Here's a comparison of the different approaches, including their pros and cons:

1. **JQuery - direct + class**:
	* Pros: Easy to read and maintain code, straightforward approach.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient as other methods due to jQuery's overhead.
2. **JQuery - cloneNode + class**:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient than the direct approach since it reuses an existing element.
	* Cons: Requires more memory allocation and copying of data, which can impact performance.
3. **prototype.join**:
	* Pros: Customizable and flexible way to concatenate class names.
	* Cons: Not a standard jQuery method, may not be well-supported by other libraries or browsers.
4. **forcycle**:
	* Pros: Simple and concise code, similar to the direct approach.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient as the cloneNode approach since it creates a new element for each iteration.

**Library and Syntax Considerations**

The test cases use jQuery as a library, which is a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation. The `$(...)` syntax is used throughout the benchmark to create new DOM elements or select existing ones.

There are no special JS features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark, but it's worth noting that the `join` function on the prototype of jQuery is not a standard method and may not be well-supported by other libraries or browsers.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to creating new DOM elements, here are some options:

1. **Vanilla JavaScript**: You can use the `document.createElement()` method to create new DOM elements without relying on jQuery.
2. **React or Vue.js**: These popular front-end frameworks provide built-in methods for creating and manipulating DOM elements, which may offer better performance than the benchmarked approaches.
3. **Other libraries**: There are other JavaScript libraries available that specialize in DOM manipulation, such as AngularJS or Ember.js.

In conclusion, this benchmark provides a useful comparison of different approaches to creating new DOM elements using jQuery. By understanding the pros and cons of each approach, developers can choose the most efficient method for their specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

JQuery new div element with class - 1k reps (with prototype.join2) (version: 0)

Faster way to create new dom elements before insertion with JQuery (+ set class)

Comparing performance of: JQuery - direct + class vs JQuery - cloneNode + class vs prototype.join vs forcycle

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JQuery - direct + class

JQuery - cloneNode + class

prototype.join

forcycle

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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