Benchmark: TreeWalker vs querySelectorAll vs NodeIterator --2

HTML Preparation code:

<!-- article out start -->
<article>
  <!-- article in start -->
  <h1>Lorem ipsum</h1>
  <p>Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit. Cumque, nostrum.</p>
  <!-- article in end -->
</article>
<!-- article out end -->

<!-- article out start -->
<article>
  <!-- article in start -->
  <h1>Lorem ipsum</h1>
  <p>Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit. Cumque, nostrum.</p>
  <!-- article in end -->
</article>
<!-- article out end -->

<!-- article out start -->
<article>
  <!-- article in start -->
  <h1>Lorem ipsum</h1>
  <p>Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit. Cumque, nostrum.</p>
  <!-- article in end -->
</article>
<!-- article out end -->

Tests:

TreeWalker
const walker = document.createTreeWalker( document.body, NodeFilter.SHOW_ELEMENT, ); for (let node = walker.nextNode(), i = 0; node; i++, node= walker.nextNode() ) { if(node.nodeName == "article") node.className = 'classy' ; }
querySelectorAll
const elements = Array.from(document.body.querySelectorAll('article')) for(let el of elements){el.className = 'classy'}
NodeIterator
const walker = document.createNodeIterator( document.body, NodeFilter.SHOW_ELEMENT, ); for (let node = walker.nextNode(), i = 0; node; i++, node= walker.nextNode() ) { if(node.nodeName == "article") node.className = 'classy' ; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
TreeWalker
querySelectorAll
NodeIterator

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:122.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/122.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 122 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

querySelectorAll

318K/s

NodeIterator

155K/s

TreeWalker

117K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ querySelectorAll	317,937 Ops/sec
NodeIterator	155,009 Ops/sec
TreeWalker	117,435 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in the provided JSON.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing three different approaches to traverse and modify elements within an HTML document:

1. `TreeWalker`
2. `querySelectorAll` (also known as the "DOM Traversing API")
3. `NodeIterator`

**Options Compared**

Each approach has its own pros and cons:

* **TreeWalker**: This is a low-level, DOM-centric approach that allows for fine-grained control over traversal. However, it can be slower due to the overhead of creating and managing the tree walker object.
	+ Pros: High precision, flexible, and suitable for complex traversals.
	+ Cons: Can be slower, requires more code, and has more dependencies (e.g., `document.createTreeWalker`).
* **querySelectorAll**: This is a higher-level API that uses CSS selectors to traverse the DOM. It's generally faster than TreeWalker but less flexible.
	+ Pros: Faster, easier to use, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: Less precise, limited control over traversal, and may not work as expected for complex traversals.
* **NodeIterator**: Similar to TreeWalker, NodeIterator is a low-level API that allows for fine-grained control over traversal. However, it's less well-known and more cumbersome to use than TreeWalker.
	+ Pros: High precision, flexible, and suitable for complex traversals.
	+ Cons: Can be slower due to the overhead of creating and managing the node iterator object.

**Library and Purpose**

* `querySelectorAll` is a part of the DOM Traversing API, which provides a set of methods for navigating and querying elements within an HTML document. Its purpose is to simplify the process of traversing the DOM using CSS selectors.
* `NodeIterator` is also part of the DOM Traversing API, providing a way to iterate over the nodes in the DOM while allowing developers to control the traversal.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The benchmark uses JavaScript features such as `const`, arrow functions (`=>`), and template literals (`\r\n`) which are part of ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) syntax. These features provide improved code readability, conciseness, and maintainability.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to traverse and modify elements within an HTML document, other alternatives include:

* `getElementsByClassName`: A method that returns a collection of elements with the specified class name.
* `document.querySelectorAll`: A method that returns a NodeList or HTMLCollection of elements matching the specified CSS selectors.
* Third-party libraries like jQuery, which provide more extensive DOM traversal and manipulation capabilities.

Keep in mind that each approach has its own trade-offs and may be better suited for specific use cases.

TreeWalker vs querySelectorAll vs NodeIterator --2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `TreeWalker vs querySelectorAll vs NodeIterator`

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

TreeWalker

querySelectorAll

NodeIterator

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

TreeWalker vs querySelectorAll vs NodeIterator --2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: TreeWalker vs querySelectorAll vs NodeIterator

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

TreeWalker

querySelectorAll

NodeIterator

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `TreeWalker vs querySelectorAll vs NodeIterator`