Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
not perf
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
not css vs filter
Created:
6 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> <div class="test"></div> <div class="test magic"></div>
Tests:
not css
$('.test:not(.magic)').length
filter
$('.test').filter(':not(.magic)').length
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
not css
filter
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided JSON data to understand what is being tested and compared in this JavaScript microbenchmark. **Overview** The benchmark is designed to test the performance of JavaScript code on different platforms (browsers) for specific tasks involving DOM manipulation with jQuery. **Benchmark Definition** The `Script Preparation Code` section defines a simple HTML page that includes jQuery 3.3.1, which is loaded from a CDN. The `Html Preparation Code` section adds two div elements to the page: `.test` and `.test magic`. The actual benchmarking part is contained in the `Benchmark Definition` JSON array, which consists of two individual test cases: 1. `not css`: This test case uses jQuery's `$.('.test:not(.magic)').length` expression to count the number of elements with the class `test` that do not have the class `magic`. 2. `filter`: This test case uses jQuery's `$('.test').filter(':not(.magic)').length` expression to filter out elements with the class `magic` from the `.test` set. **Comparison Options** These two test cases compare different approaches: 1. **Plain selector (`$.('.test:not(.magic)').length)`):** This method uses a single selector with a negation pseudo-class (`:not`) to exclude elements with the `magic` class. 2. **Filtering with `.filter()` (`$('.test').filter(':not(.magic)').length`)**: This method uses the `.filter()` method to create a new array of elements that do not match the `:not(.magic)` selector, and then gets the length of this filtered array. **Pros and Cons** 1. **Plain selector**: * Pros: Simple, efficient, and often faster. * Cons: May require more CSS class names if you need to exclude multiple classes. 2. **Filtering with `.filter()`**: * Pros: Allows for more flexibility in excluding elements (e.g., using multiple selectors or negation). * Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of the `.filter()` method. **Other Considerations** * jQuery's `$.fn.filter()` method is generally faster than using plain CSS selectors because it uses a optimized internal algorithm. * Using a library like jQuery can provide additional benefits, such as improved DOM manipulation performance and easier event handling. **Library: jQuery** jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that provides an easy-to-use API for working with HTML documents and DOM elements. It includes various methods for selecting and manipulating elements, filtering data, and handling events. In this benchmark, jQuery's `$.fn.filter()` method is used to filter out elements with the `magic` class from the `.test` set. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these test cases. They use standard JavaScript expressions and jQuery methods. **Alternative Approaches** Other alternatives for these benchmarking scenarios might include: * Using plain CSS selectors without a library like jQuery. * Implementing custom filtering logic using JavaScript loops. * Comparing the performance of different libraries, such as vanilla JavaScript or other DOM manipulation libraries (e.g., React or Vue.js). These alternatives would require adjusting the test cases to reflect the specific use case and desired comparison.
Related benchmarks:
This is a test benchmark
class selector
spread vs for of
testthis
Compare jQuery 3.6.0 vs 3.2.1 performance
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?