Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
QuerySelector vs getElementsByClassName - Emo test
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
query vs getElementsByClassName
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<div class="test"></div>
Tests:
query
document.querySelector('.test')
getElementsByClassName
document.getElementsByClassName('test')[0]
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
query
getElementsByClassName
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 and explain what's being tested, compared, and discussed. **What is being tested?** The benchmark tests two different ways to select an element from an HTML document: `document.querySelector` (query) and `document.getElementsByClassName` (getElementsByClassName). The test case uses a simple HTML element with a class name "test". **Options being compared** There are two options being compared: 1. **`document.querySelector('.test')`**: This method is used to select an element by its class name. 2. **`document.getElementsByClassName('test')[0]`**: This method is also used to select an element by its class name, but it returns a NodeList of all elements with the specified class name, and then uses `[0]` to get the first element in the list. **Pros and Cons** * `document.querySelector('.test')`: + Pros: More efficient and concise way to select an element by its class name. It's also more modern and widely supported. + Cons: If no elements are found, it returns null. If you need to get all elements with the specified class name, you need to use a different method or iterate over the results. * `document.getElementsByClassName('test')[0]`: + Pros: Returns an element even if none is found in the DOM. However, this can be slower and less efficient than using `querySelector`. + Cons: The syntax can look more verbose, and it's not as modern as `querySelector`. **Library and purpose** There isn't a specific library being used here. **Special JS feature or syntax** This benchmark doesn't use any special JavaScript features or syntax. It only uses the standard DOM API methods for selecting elements. **Other alternatives** If you wanted to compare other methods, some alternative approaches could be: * Using `document.querySelectorAll('.test')` instead of `getElementsByClassName`. This would return a NodeList of all elements with the specified class name. * Using `element.matches()` or `element.contains()` to check if an element matches a selector. **Benchmark preparation code** The benchmark preparation code is a simple HTML element with a class name "test": `<div class="test"></div>`. This ensures that both methods can select the same element. In summary, this benchmark tests two common ways to select an element by its class name in JavaScript: `document.querySelector` and `document.getElementsByClassName`. The results show that `querySelector` is more efficient but returns null if no elements are found.
Related benchmarks:
querySelector() vs getElementsByClassName()[0]
querySelector vs getElementsByClassName[0] Perf
getElementsByClassName()[0] vs querySelectorAll
querySelector vs getElementsByClassName My
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?