This site's run a test between the 3 different methods and it seems .html
is the fastest, followed by .append
. followed by .innerHTML
. Can someone explain to me the reasons why?
Here's the site which does the comparison among the three methods.
I have read this this SO question which is related but I don't really understand the given answer, and the question didn't really elaborate much regarding .innerHtml
.
I don't understand the following part:
A temporary element is created, let's call it x. x's innerHTML is set to the string of HTML that you've passed. Then jQuery will transfer each of the produced nodes (that is, x's childNodes) over to a newly created document fragment, which it will then cache for next time. It will then return the fragment's childNodes as a fresh DOM collection. Note that it's actually a lot more complicated than that, as jQuery does a bunch of cross-browser checks and various other optimisations. E.g. if you pass just
<div></div>
to jQuery(), jQuery will take a shortcut and simply do document.createElement('div').
Can someone simplify this?
html is the fastest, followed by . append . followed by . innerHTML .
innerHTML is slow because it has to look for HTML tags in the value, and parse it into DOM nodes. If you're just inserting plain text that doesn't contain any HTML tags, use textContent instead.
The use of innerHTML creates a potential security risk for your website. Malicious users can use cross-site scripting (XSS) to add malicious client-side scripts that steal private user information stored in session cookies.
All three are slow to me. Modifying the dom on each iteration is slow.
http://jsperf.com/jquery-append-vs-html-list-performance/24
I just added a new test in there:
var html = []; for (var i = 0; i < len; i++) { html.push('<div>Test ' + i + '</div>'); } document.getElementById('list').innerHTML = html.join('');
This is much faster again. :)
My method in Firefox does 26k Ops/sec vs 1,000, 10,000, and 13
That benchmark is worthless. innerHTML
is always faster than DOM manipulation.
jQuery seems faster because it prepares a string with all the HTML first while the others do one operation each iteration. Also note that jQuery.html() uses innerHTML
whenever it can.
var html = ''; for (var i = 0; i < len; i++) { html += '<div>Test ' + i + '</div>'; } $('#list').html(html);
var list = document.getElementById('list'); for (var i = 0; i < len; i++) { list.innerHTML = list.innerHTML + '<div>Test ' + i + '</div>'; }
The test for innerHTML
would be a lot faster if it was written like:
var list = document.getElementById('list'); var html = ''; for (var i = 0; i < len; i++) { html += '<div>Test ' + i + '</div>'; } list.innerHTML = html;
http://jsben.ch/#/yDvKH
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With