Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
create element test
(version: 0)
test
Comparing performance of:
jq vs van
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
for(i=0; i<10000; i++){}
Tests:
jq
$("<span></span>")
van
$(document.createElement("span"))
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
jq
van
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** The test measures the performance of creating HTML elements in two different ways: 1. Using jQuery's `$(selector)` syntax (`"jq"` test case) 2. Creating an element using `document.createElement` (`"van"` test case) **Options Compared** In this benchmark, two approaches are compared: * **jQuery's $() syntax**: This is a common way to select and manipulate HTML elements in web applications. It provides a convenient way to access and interact with elements on the page. * **`document.createElement`**: This is a low-level method that allows you to create new HTML elements programmatically. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: **jQuery's $() syntax:** Pros: * Faster and more concise way to select elements * Reduces the amount of code needed, making it easier to maintain * Provides a consistent API for selecting elements across browsers Cons: * Can be slower in some cases due to the overhead of parsing the selector * May require additional library dependencies (in this case, jQuery) **`document.createElement`:** Pros: * More control over the creation process * Can be faster if you only need to create a single element * No dependency on external libraries Cons: * Requires more code and can lead to more verbose HTML generation * May require additional logic for manipulating created elements **Library: jQuery** In the `jq` test case, the script includes jQuery's library. jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation and event handling. The `$()` syntax allows you to select and interact with HTML elements in a convenient way. **Special JS Feature/Syntax: None** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. **Other Alternatives** If you wanted to create similar benchmarks, you could consider testing other approaches, such as: * Using vanilla JavaScript (without jQuery) for the `document.createElement` test case * Testing other libraries like React or Angular that provide similar functionality to jQuery's $() syntax **Benchmark Preparation Code and JSON Explanation** The script preparation code is a simple loop (`for(i=0; i<10000; i++){}`), which does not affect the performance of creating elements. The HTML preparation code includes jQuery's library. In the benchmark JSON, each test case has a unique `Benchmark Definition` string that represents how to create an element: * `"jq"`: This is a jQuery selector syntax (`" $("#selector")"`). * `"van"`: This is a vanilla JavaScript method (`document.createElement("tag")`). The latest benchmark results show the performance of both approaches on Firefox 61, with "van" being slightly faster.
Related benchmarks:
jQuery needs cached selectors.
HTML insertion
Inserting children
createElement vs cloneNode vs JQuery
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?