Is it faster to compute values before using them within an event handler












2














This may be a dumb question, but let's say I'm creating event handlers for a class of elements, and each event handler depends on some specific computations for the particular element to which it's assigned. I'd assume the event handler will respond faster if the computations are done in advance and then placed in the handler, like this for example:



        $('.myElements').each(function () {

// Computations

$(this).click(function () {

// Handler using computations

});

});


As opposed to this:



        $('.myElements').click(function () {

// Computations
// Handler using computations

});


I'd assume the first approach will result in faster firing because the computation is done in advance of the actual click event. But is that necessarily the case? I ask because I'm comparing the two, and at least anecdotally, the latter approach seems to be as fast as the first, if not faster. And the computations I'm concerned about are some unavoidable regexes.










share|improve this question
























  • Unless the computations are extremely CPU-intensive, it's not something to worry about, especially in reference to a click handler (users are much slower than computers :) ) First code block will take more resources upfront, but the click handler will perform (very slightly) faster, second code block will be the reverse.
    – CertainPerformance
    Nov 13 '18 at 1:41












  • Assume 1000 such elements the first has to do all those computations immediately on page load whereas the second only has to do them on demand for instance specific event occurrence and not until the event occurs. Page load is hectic with lots of script doing different things, IMO better to only do the computations when needed
    – charlietfl
    Nov 13 '18 at 1:52












  • A few times I have used Console.time() for performance meassurements, you can do some testing with this method. In your case, the first approach will consume more time at document load. So, unless the computation takes too much time, in the way that you note ir affect the user experience, I will go with the second approach.
    – Shidersz
    Nov 13 '18 at 2:19










  • If you really want to get fancy could also do the computations in a webWorker thread which runs separate from code in main thread
    – charlietfl
    Nov 13 '18 at 2:34


















2














This may be a dumb question, but let's say I'm creating event handlers for a class of elements, and each event handler depends on some specific computations for the particular element to which it's assigned. I'd assume the event handler will respond faster if the computations are done in advance and then placed in the handler, like this for example:



        $('.myElements').each(function () {

// Computations

$(this).click(function () {

// Handler using computations

});

});


As opposed to this:



        $('.myElements').click(function () {

// Computations
// Handler using computations

});


I'd assume the first approach will result in faster firing because the computation is done in advance of the actual click event. But is that necessarily the case? I ask because I'm comparing the two, and at least anecdotally, the latter approach seems to be as fast as the first, if not faster. And the computations I'm concerned about are some unavoidable regexes.










share|improve this question
























  • Unless the computations are extremely CPU-intensive, it's not something to worry about, especially in reference to a click handler (users are much slower than computers :) ) First code block will take more resources upfront, but the click handler will perform (very slightly) faster, second code block will be the reverse.
    – CertainPerformance
    Nov 13 '18 at 1:41












  • Assume 1000 such elements the first has to do all those computations immediately on page load whereas the second only has to do them on demand for instance specific event occurrence and not until the event occurs. Page load is hectic with lots of script doing different things, IMO better to only do the computations when needed
    – charlietfl
    Nov 13 '18 at 1:52












  • A few times I have used Console.time() for performance meassurements, you can do some testing with this method. In your case, the first approach will consume more time at document load. So, unless the computation takes too much time, in the way that you note ir affect the user experience, I will go with the second approach.
    – Shidersz
    Nov 13 '18 at 2:19










  • If you really want to get fancy could also do the computations in a webWorker thread which runs separate from code in main thread
    – charlietfl
    Nov 13 '18 at 2:34
















2












2








2







This may be a dumb question, but let's say I'm creating event handlers for a class of elements, and each event handler depends on some specific computations for the particular element to which it's assigned. I'd assume the event handler will respond faster if the computations are done in advance and then placed in the handler, like this for example:



        $('.myElements').each(function () {

// Computations

$(this).click(function () {

// Handler using computations

});

});


As opposed to this:



        $('.myElements').click(function () {

// Computations
// Handler using computations

});


I'd assume the first approach will result in faster firing because the computation is done in advance of the actual click event. But is that necessarily the case? I ask because I'm comparing the two, and at least anecdotally, the latter approach seems to be as fast as the first, if not faster. And the computations I'm concerned about are some unavoidable regexes.










share|improve this question















This may be a dumb question, but let's say I'm creating event handlers for a class of elements, and each event handler depends on some specific computations for the particular element to which it's assigned. I'd assume the event handler will respond faster if the computations are done in advance and then placed in the handler, like this for example:



        $('.myElements').each(function () {

// Computations

$(this).click(function () {

// Handler using computations

});

});


As opposed to this:



        $('.myElements').click(function () {

// Computations
// Handler using computations

});


I'd assume the first approach will result in faster firing because the computation is done in advance of the actual click event. But is that necessarily the case? I ask because I'm comparing the two, and at least anecdotally, the latter approach seems to be as fast as the first, if not faster. And the computations I'm concerned about are some unavoidable regexes.







javascript jquery event-handling






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 13 '18 at 1:48

























asked Nov 13 '18 at 1:38









amt528

1185




1185












  • Unless the computations are extremely CPU-intensive, it's not something to worry about, especially in reference to a click handler (users are much slower than computers :) ) First code block will take more resources upfront, but the click handler will perform (very slightly) faster, second code block will be the reverse.
    – CertainPerformance
    Nov 13 '18 at 1:41












  • Assume 1000 such elements the first has to do all those computations immediately on page load whereas the second only has to do them on demand for instance specific event occurrence and not until the event occurs. Page load is hectic with lots of script doing different things, IMO better to only do the computations when needed
    – charlietfl
    Nov 13 '18 at 1:52












  • A few times I have used Console.time() for performance meassurements, you can do some testing with this method. In your case, the first approach will consume more time at document load. So, unless the computation takes too much time, in the way that you note ir affect the user experience, I will go with the second approach.
    – Shidersz
    Nov 13 '18 at 2:19










  • If you really want to get fancy could also do the computations in a webWorker thread which runs separate from code in main thread
    – charlietfl
    Nov 13 '18 at 2:34




















  • Unless the computations are extremely CPU-intensive, it's not something to worry about, especially in reference to a click handler (users are much slower than computers :) ) First code block will take more resources upfront, but the click handler will perform (very slightly) faster, second code block will be the reverse.
    – CertainPerformance
    Nov 13 '18 at 1:41












  • Assume 1000 such elements the first has to do all those computations immediately on page load whereas the second only has to do them on demand for instance specific event occurrence and not until the event occurs. Page load is hectic with lots of script doing different things, IMO better to only do the computations when needed
    – charlietfl
    Nov 13 '18 at 1:52












  • A few times I have used Console.time() for performance meassurements, you can do some testing with this method. In your case, the first approach will consume more time at document load. So, unless the computation takes too much time, in the way that you note ir affect the user experience, I will go with the second approach.
    – Shidersz
    Nov 13 '18 at 2:19










  • If you really want to get fancy could also do the computations in a webWorker thread which runs separate from code in main thread
    – charlietfl
    Nov 13 '18 at 2:34


















Unless the computations are extremely CPU-intensive, it's not something to worry about, especially in reference to a click handler (users are much slower than computers :) ) First code block will take more resources upfront, but the click handler will perform (very slightly) faster, second code block will be the reverse.
– CertainPerformance
Nov 13 '18 at 1:41






Unless the computations are extremely CPU-intensive, it's not something to worry about, especially in reference to a click handler (users are much slower than computers :) ) First code block will take more resources upfront, but the click handler will perform (very slightly) faster, second code block will be the reverse.
– CertainPerformance
Nov 13 '18 at 1:41














Assume 1000 such elements the first has to do all those computations immediately on page load whereas the second only has to do them on demand for instance specific event occurrence and not until the event occurs. Page load is hectic with lots of script doing different things, IMO better to only do the computations when needed
– charlietfl
Nov 13 '18 at 1:52






Assume 1000 such elements the first has to do all those computations immediately on page load whereas the second only has to do them on demand for instance specific event occurrence and not until the event occurs. Page load is hectic with lots of script doing different things, IMO better to only do the computations when needed
– charlietfl
Nov 13 '18 at 1:52














A few times I have used Console.time() for performance meassurements, you can do some testing with this method. In your case, the first approach will consume more time at document load. So, unless the computation takes too much time, in the way that you note ir affect the user experience, I will go with the second approach.
– Shidersz
Nov 13 '18 at 2:19




A few times I have used Console.time() for performance meassurements, you can do some testing with this method. In your case, the first approach will consume more time at document load. So, unless the computation takes too much time, in the way that you note ir affect the user experience, I will go with the second approach.
– Shidersz
Nov 13 '18 at 2:19












If you really want to get fancy could also do the computations in a webWorker thread which runs separate from code in main thread
– charlietfl
Nov 13 '18 at 2:34






If you really want to get fancy could also do the computations in a webWorker thread which runs separate from code in main thread
– charlietfl
Nov 13 '18 at 2:34














0






active

oldest

votes











Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53272533%2fis-it-faster-to-compute-values-before-using-them-within-an-event-handler%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























0






active

oldest

votes








0






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes
















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53272533%2fis-it-faster-to-compute-values-before-using-them-within-an-event-handler%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Bressuire

Vorschmack

Quarantine