停止事件冒泡 - 提高性能？ [英] Stop event bubbling - increases performance?

问题描述

如果我没有从事件回调中返回 false ，或者使用jQuery的 e.stopPropagation 功能，事件冒泡了DOM。

If I'm not returning false from an event callback, or using e.stopPropagation feature of jQuery, the event bubbles up the DOM.

在大多数情况下，我不关心事件是否起泡。与此DOM结构示例一样：

In most scenarios I don't care if the event bubbles or not. Like with this DOM structure example:

​<div id="theDiv">
    <form id="theForm" >
        <input type="submit" value="submit"/> 
    </form>
</div>​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

通常，我没有多个嵌套的提交回调，如下所示：

Normally, I don't have multiple nested submit callback like this:

$('#theDiv').submit(function() {
    alert('DIV!');
});
$('#theForm').submit(function(e) {
    alert('FORM!');
    e.preventDefault();
});​

小提琴

该DEMO将提交事件气泡显示为< div> ; ！

如果我停止传播或仅阻止默认，它对我没有区别。

Fiddle
That DEMO shows the submit event bubbles to a <div>!
It has no difference to me if I stop the Propagation or just prevent default.

在这些情况下，如果我停止传播，我会获得性能优势吗？

推荐答案

性能优势？是的，有一些轻微的好处，如 jQuery live（）之间的性能测试所述和 on（） 。正如@Joseph所指出的那样，两者之间的区别在于，live会一直传播到树上，而 on（）只会传递给最近的公共父。

Performance benefits? Yes, there are some slight benefits, as outlined in this performance test between jQuery live() and on(). As @Joseph also noted, the difference between the two is that live propagates all the way up the tree, while on() only goes to the nearest common parent.

在这些测试中，显示 on（）可以胜过 live（）最多4次。在实践中，这可能仍然不值得分裂，但如果你有非常深的html结构和大量的事件触发器，我认为停止传播的性能差异是值得的。

In those tests, it is shown that on() can outperform live() by up to 4 times. In practice, that's probably still not worth splitting hairs over, but if you have very deep html structures and lots of event triggers, the performance difference in stopping propagation can be worthwhile, I suppose.

这篇关于停止事件冒泡 - 提高性能？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！