Benchmark: checked - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<input type="checkbox"/>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.7.1/jquery.js'></script>

Tests:

is
$('input').is(':checked');
prop
$('input').prop('checked');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
is
prop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/134.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 134 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
is	242211.6 Ops/sec
prop	463366.2 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark defined in the provided JSON compares two different methods of checking whether a checkbox input is selected in a web page using jQuery. The specific comparisons are as follows:

### Test Options
1. **`$('input').is(':checked');`** - This method uses the jQuery `is()` function, which checks the current state of the input element against a selector (`:checked` in this case).
   - **Test Name:** `is`
   
2. **`$('input').prop('checked');`** - This approach utilizes the `prop()` method in jQuery, which retrieves the value of a specified property from the first element in the jQuery object. Here, it checks the `checked` property of the input.
   - **Test Name:** `prop`

### Pros and Cons
#### `is(':checked')`
- **Pros:**
  - More intuitive for users familiar with CSS selectors.
  - Generally easier to read and understand for those who might not be deeply versed in JavaScript.
  
- **Cons:**
  - Can be slightly slower than using `prop()` because it involves matching against a selector, which introduces overhead.
  - May be less direct, as it involves a check that could require more computation under the hood.

#### `prop('checked')`
- **Pros:**
  - Tends to be more efficient and faster because it directly accesses the property of the underlying DOM element without the overhead of selector matching.
  - Provides a straightforward approach as it's directly returning the `checked` status of the input element.

- **Cons:**
  - Might be less intuitive for those used to working with CSS selectors.
  - Slightly less readable for non-technical audiences as it uses a more programmatic approach.

### Other Considerations
In terms of performance, the benchmark results show a significant difference in executions per second:
- The `prop` test achieved **463,366.1875 executions per second**.
- The `is` test recorded **242,211.578125 executions per second**.

This indicates that `prop()` is more efficient for checking the checked state of a checkbox input. This performance gap can become more pronounced as the number of elements increases, which is relevant for applications where the state of numerous checkboxes is affected.

### Other Alternatives
While the benchmark focuses on jQuery's methods, there are indeed native JavaScript alternatives:
- **Using Vanilla JavaScript:**
  - `document.querySelector('input[type="checkbox"]').checked;` - This would directly query the checkbox and check its `checked` property. It would be similar in performance to `prop()`, as it directly accesses the underlying property without selector overhead.
  
Each method and approach has its own use case. In a simpler scenario, if jQuery is already being utilized in a project, sticking with jQuery's methods will enhance code consistency. However, for performance-critical applications, using native JavaScript methods like `querySelector` can yield better results.

Related benchmarks:

checked (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: is vs prop

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

is

prop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):