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，或者没有使用jQuery的e.stopPropagation功能，则该事件会使DOM冒泡.

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，我都不关心事件是否冒泡.就像下面的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，我没有像这样的多个嵌套的提交回调:

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显示submit事件冒泡到<div>！
如果我停止传播或只是阻止默认设置，对我来说没有任何区别.

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，我将获得性能收益吗?

推荐答案

性能优势?是的，在此jQuery live()和on()之间的性能测试中概述了一些细微的好处..正如@Joseph还指出的那样，两者之间的区别是live一直传播到整个树上，而on()仅到达最近的公共父级.

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.

在那些测试中，表明on()的性能最高可达live() 4倍.在实践中，这可能仍然不值得花些时间，但是我想，如果您具有非常深的html结构和大量事件触发器，则在停止传播方面的性能差异可能是值得的.

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！