Benchmark: attr setting demo

Script Preparation code:

let A=document.createElement('input'),B=document.createElement('input'),C=document.createElement('input')
let attrComb='typecheckboxnameariacceptimage/png, image/jpeg'

Tests:

listed
let attr=['type','checkbox','name','ari','accept','image/png, image/jpeg'] for(let i =0;i<6;i+=2)A.setAttribute(attr[i],attr[i+1]);
separate list
let attr0=['type','name','accept'] let attr1=['checkbox','ari','image/png, image/jpeg'] for(let i =0;i<3;++i)B.setAttribute(attr0[i],attr1[i]);
direct
C.type='checkbox' C.name='ari' C.accept='image/png, image/jpeg'

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
listed
separate list
direct

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
listed	4441854.5 Ops/sec
separate list	4432996.5 Ops/sec
direct	8123469.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 3 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided benchmark evaluates different methods of setting attributes on HTML input elements using JavaScript. There are three test cases compared in this benchmark, each employing a distinct approach: **listed**, **separate list**, and **direct**. Below is a detailed breakdown of what each test does, along with the pros and cons of the approaches used.

### Test Cases Overview

1. **Test: listed**
   - **Benchmark Definition**: This test uses an array of attributes that are applied to the input element A in pairs. The setup involves iterating through the array with a step size of 2.
   - **Execution**: `A.setAttribute(attr[i], attr[i+1]);` is called to set the attributes using a loop.
   - **Performance Results**: Executions per second - 4,441,854.5

2. **Test: separate list**
   - **Benchmark Definition**: This test separates attributes into two distinct arrays, one for the attribute names and one for their corresponding values.
   - **Execution**: Similar to the first test, attributes are set using an index loop, but this time drawing from the two separate arrays: `B.setAttribute(attr0[i], attr1[i]);`.
   - **Performance Results**: Executions per second - 4,432,996.5

3. **Test: direct**
   - **Benchmark Definition**: In this test, attributes are set directly using dot notation.
   - **Execution**: The attributes are set individually using `C.type`, `C.name`, and `C.accept`.
   - **Performance Results**: Executions per second - 8,123,469.5

### Pros and Cons of Each Approach

1. **Listed Method**
   - **Pros**: It allows for a more dynamic and concise attribute setting method, especially useful if the attribute list is generated dynamically or varies.
   - **Cons**: The performance is slower compared to the direct method due to the overhead of calling `setAttribute` for multiple attribute pairs and looping.

2. **Separate List Method**
   - **Pros**: Similar to the listed method, it enables a structured way to handle attributes by separating names and values. This can enhance readability and organization.
   - **Cons**: It has marginally worse performance compared to the listed method, as it still involves multiple calls to `setAttribute` rather than directly accessing object properties.

3. **Direct Method**
   - **Pros**: This method is the fastest of the three, as it directly assigns values to the input element properties. It's also the most straightforward for static configurations without needing to manage arrays.
   - **Cons**: It lacks flexibility; if attributes need to change dynamically or if there are many attributes to set, the code can become verbose and unmanageable.

### Additional Considerations
- **Readability and Maintainability**: The direct setting approach makes it very clear what properties are being set, which is great for clarity. However, the use of arrays in the first two methods can lend itself to more succinct code when dealing with a larger number of properties, especially if they can be generated dynamically.
- **Browser Compatibility**: The benchmark indicates results from Chrome 131 on macOS, but developers should consider testing in multiple browsers, as performance characteristics can vary.

### Alternatives
- **Using Object Assign**: Instead of setting properties one by one, another alternative is using `Object.assign()` to copy properties from a configuration object directly to the input element. This could yield better performance than a loop with `setAttribute`.
- **jQuery or Other Libraries**: Libraries like jQuery can simplify attribute manipulation (`$(element).attr(attribute, value)`), but they introduce overhead and may impact performance on high-frequency operations.

In summary, while the **direct** method is the most performant in the benchmark, the choice between the approaches should consider the specific needs for flexibility, readability, and maintainability in the application context.

Related benchmarks:

attr setting demo (version: 3)

Comparing performance of: listed vs separate list vs direct

Created: 3 months ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

listed

separate list

direct

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 3 months ago):