Client-Side Benchmarks

Alex R. Young





tutorials frameworks lmaf optimisation

Client-Side Benchmarks

Posted by Alex R. Young on .

tutorials frameworks lmaf optimisation

Client-Side Benchmarks

Posted by Alex R. Young on .
*Let's Make a Framework* is an ongoing series about building a JavaScript framework from the ground up. These articles are tagged with [lmaf](http://dailyjs.com/tags.html#lmaf). The project we're creating is called [Turing](http://github.com/alexyoung/turing.js). Documentation is available at [turingjs.com](http://turingjs.com/).

Last week we had a very interesting discussion about optimising the
deceptively simple hasClass function that I wrote for
Turing's DOM module. Not only is optimisation difficult, once you bring
browsers into the mix it can seem like a dark art. Particularly when
cross-browser issues are taken into account, which is why I've covered
things like cached browser feature detection in previous tutorials.

I mentioned that we really needed client-side benchmarks to talk
confidently about performance, because my benchmark example script was
just intended to be used in Node. As I already used
Benchmark.js (GitHub: bestiejs / benchmark.js, License: MIT,
npm: benchmark) I've used it again for browser benchmarks. And guess
what? It even works in IE6!

Writing Browser Benchmarks

I've added benchmark "latest" to the
devDependencies in the
package.json file. Then, at the bottom of a HTML test harness file, I added a script
tag to load Benchmark.js.

Next I wrote a pure JavaScript file for the DOM-related benchmarks and
added it to the other script tags:

var suite = new Benchmark.Suite,
    div = $t('#test-div')[0],
    cache = {};

function log(text) {
  $t('#results').append('' + text + '');

function hasClassRegExp(element, className) {
  if (element.className && element.className.length) {
    return new RegExp('(^|\\s)' + className + '($|\\s)').test(element.className);
  } else {
    return false;

function hasClassCachedRegExp(element, className) {
  if (!cache[className]) {
    cache[className] = new RegExp('(^|\\s)' + className + '($|\\s)');
  if (element.className && element.className.length) {
    return cache[className].test(element.className);
  } else {
    return false;

suite.add('hasClassRegExp', function() {
  hasClassRegExp(div, 'example1');
  hasClassRegExp(div, 'unknown');
.add('hasClassCachedRegExp', function() {
  hasClassCachedRegExp(div, 'example1');
  hasClassCachedRegExp(div, 'unknown');
.add('built-in', function() {
  turing.dom.hasClass(div, 'example1');
  turing.dom.hasClass(div, 'unknown');
.on('cycle', function(event, bench) {
.on('complete', function() {
  log('Fastest is ' + this.filter('fastest').pluck('name'));

Benchmark.js uses callbacks and events to organise benchmarks. That
means you need to instantiate a suite using var suite = new
, then add benchmarks using
suite.add('name', function() {}). It allows chaining, so as
you can see I've added a few benchmarks and then watched for two events,
cycle and complete. The cycle
event will run after each benchmark. Easy!

I'm using the \$t Turing alias to do some simple DOM
manipulation for displaying results. The log function could
actually be placed in a benchmark helpers file once more benchmarks have
been added. Just out of interest, I kept the old simple
hasClass functions and also included the one currently
implemented in turing.dom.hasClass.

This benchmark also includes hasClassCachedRegExp. I
noticed that Zepto caches regexes,
and it turns out this performs extremely well in Firefox and Chrome, but
not so well in IE6. However, remember that when comparing the built-in
function, you might be looking at element.classList
depending on the browser. In Firefox, Ryan Cannon's
String.prototype.indexOf solution performs better than

Given that each browser appears to have different performance
characteristics, should we use different functions? I'd probably never
do this, unless I was targeting a specific browser. This might sound
unusual, but plenty of people are developing games that can only run in
WebKit mobile browsers (and Zepto specifically targets WebKit).


Chrome 13, Mac:

Firefox 6, Mac:

Internet Explorer 6, Windows XP, VirtualBoxVM:


If you're working on client-side code, it doesn't take much work to be
scientific about benchmarks. And, using Node and npm to manage your
tools can make it quick to set things up. When writing optimised code,
don't champion a given solution -- be scientific, experiment, and try to
discover the solution most suited to the task at hand. In the interest
of science, benchmarks like these should be run on a wide range of
machines (not just virtual machines, but I use those purely for

This code can be found in commit