Interesting 'innerHTML' is mentioned as a crappy native equivalent. In theory, I agree. But last time I compared innerHTML vs DOM fragments, innerHTML was much much faster across the browsers I tried (this was just before JITs for JS became common place).
The tradeoff it seems is the browsers native HTML parser and serialization vs holding a DOM tree in JS, and for large sets at least, innerHTML won handily.
Okay. Revision 9 adds code to remove the inserted elements, to put every test on equal footing. Is the practical equivalent yours? Because it hits a sweet spot.
The one called "MUCH MORE PRACTIVAL native equivalent" is a mistake, it doesn't do anything. I didn't know documentFragment lacks the innerHTML property so is not doing any parsing like the others.
Ah, that explains it. I can't submit Firefox results, though. The crappy native equivalent just locks up after throwing several "unresponsive script" warnings.
