Benchmark: createDocumentFragment vs map + append

Tests:

createDocumentFragment
var arr = Array.from({ length: 1e4 }, (_, i) => i) var body = document.body var fragment = document.createDocumentFragment() var dummyDiv = document.createElement('div') fragment.append(arr.map(v => { div = dummyDiv.cloneNode(true) div.textContent = v return div })) body.append(fragment)
map + append
var arr = Array.from({ length: 1e4 }, (_, i) => i) var body = document.body var dummyDiv = document.createElement('div') body.append(arr.map(v => { div = dummyDiv.cloneNode(true) div.textContent = v return div }))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
createDocumentFragment
map + append

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON defines two benchmark cases: `createDocumentFragment` and `map + append`. These benchmarks compare the performance of creating a document fragment versus mapping an array and appending it to the DOM.

**Options Compared**

In the `createDocumentFragment` case, the benchmark tests:

1. Creating a new `document.createDocumentFragment()` instance.
2. Mapping over an array (created using `Array.from`) and cloning a `div` element for each item in the array.
3. Appending the mapped elements to the document fragment.

In the `map + append` case, the benchmark tests:

1. Creating an array using `Array.from`.
2. Mapping over the array and cloning a `div` element for each item in the array.
3. Appending the cloned elements directly to the DOM (specifically, the `body` element).

**Pros and Cons**

**CreateDocumentFragment Approach:**

Pros:

* Can be more efficient when dealing with large datasets, as it avoids appending multiple elements to the DOM at once.
* Can reduce the number of garbage collections.

Cons:

* Requires creating a new document fragment instance, which can have overhead due to its own DOM structure and content.
* May require additional memory allocation for the fragment.

**Map + Append Approach:**

Pros:

* Simpler implementation with fewer lines of code.
* Does not create an intermediate DOM structure (document fragment).

Cons:

* Can be less efficient when dealing with large datasets, as it appends multiple elements to the DOM at once.
* May lead to increased garbage collections due to the creation of many temporary DOM elements.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

Neither benchmark case uses a specific library. However, it does utilize a JavaScript feature: template literals (the `\r\n\r\n` formatting in the `map + append` case is a hint at this).

Template literals are a feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 that allows you to embed expressions inside string literals.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

1. Using `Array.prototype.forEach`: Instead of using `map()` and appending the results directly to the DOM, you could use `forEach()` to iterate over the array and append elements individually.
2. Using a library like jQuery or Underscore.js: These libraries often provide optimized DOM manipulation functions that can be used to simplify the benchmarking process.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional complexity or overhead, which should be considered when choosing a benchmarking approach.

Related benchmarks:

createDocumentFragment vs map + append (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: createDocumentFragment vs map + append

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

createDocumentFragment

map + append

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):