document.getElementById(“myId”) vs component.find(“myId”).getElement();
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
What is better to use document.getElementById("myId")
or component.find("myId").getElement();
in terms of performance? What will be faster?
lightning-components lightning id aura-id
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
What is better to use document.getElementById("myId")
or component.find("myId").getElement();
in terms of performance? What will be faster?
lightning-components lightning id aura-id
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
What is better to use document.getElementById("myId")
or component.find("myId").getElement();
in terms of performance? What will be faster?
lightning-components lightning id aura-id
What is better to use document.getElementById("myId")
or component.find("myId").getElement();
in terms of performance? What will be faster?
lightning-components lightning id aura-id
lightning-components lightning id aura-id
asked Nov 21 at 16:57
yourbuddy
534
534
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
Regardless of performance, you should use component.find
. Document query selectors aren't recommended in lightning, whereas component.find
has explicit support:
Valid DOM Access
The following methods are valid DOM access because the elements are created by
c:domLocker
.
cmp.getElements()
Returns the elements in the DOM rendered by the component.
cmp.find()
Returns the div and button components, identified by their aura:id attributes.
cmp.find("div1").getElement()
Returns the DOM element for the div as c:domLocker created the div.
event.getSource().get("v.name")
Returns the name of the button that dispatched the event; in this case, myButton.
Notice the complete absence of query selectors in the enumeration of valid methods to access the DOM. It's not a supported approach, strictly speaking, even if it may work today.
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
Regardless of performance, you should use component.find
. Document query selectors aren't recommended in lightning, whereas component.find
has explicit support:
Valid DOM Access
The following methods are valid DOM access because the elements are created by
c:domLocker
.
cmp.getElements()
Returns the elements in the DOM rendered by the component.
cmp.find()
Returns the div and button components, identified by their aura:id attributes.
cmp.find("div1").getElement()
Returns the DOM element for the div as c:domLocker created the div.
event.getSource().get("v.name")
Returns the name of the button that dispatched the event; in this case, myButton.
Notice the complete absence of query selectors in the enumeration of valid methods to access the DOM. It's not a supported approach, strictly speaking, even if it may work today.
add a comment |
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
Regardless of performance, you should use component.find
. Document query selectors aren't recommended in lightning, whereas component.find
has explicit support:
Valid DOM Access
The following methods are valid DOM access because the elements are created by
c:domLocker
.
cmp.getElements()
Returns the elements in the DOM rendered by the component.
cmp.find()
Returns the div and button components, identified by their aura:id attributes.
cmp.find("div1").getElement()
Returns the DOM element for the div as c:domLocker created the div.
event.getSource().get("v.name")
Returns the name of the button that dispatched the event; in this case, myButton.
Notice the complete absence of query selectors in the enumeration of valid methods to access the DOM. It's not a supported approach, strictly speaking, even if it may work today.
add a comment |
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
up vote
7
down vote
accepted
Regardless of performance, you should use component.find
. Document query selectors aren't recommended in lightning, whereas component.find
has explicit support:
Valid DOM Access
The following methods are valid DOM access because the elements are created by
c:domLocker
.
cmp.getElements()
Returns the elements in the DOM rendered by the component.
cmp.find()
Returns the div and button components, identified by their aura:id attributes.
cmp.find("div1").getElement()
Returns the DOM element for the div as c:domLocker created the div.
event.getSource().get("v.name")
Returns the name of the button that dispatched the event; in this case, myButton.
Notice the complete absence of query selectors in the enumeration of valid methods to access the DOM. It's not a supported approach, strictly speaking, even if it may work today.
Regardless of performance, you should use component.find
. Document query selectors aren't recommended in lightning, whereas component.find
has explicit support:
Valid DOM Access
The following methods are valid DOM access because the elements are created by
c:domLocker
.
cmp.getElements()
Returns the elements in the DOM rendered by the component.
cmp.find()
Returns the div and button components, identified by their aura:id attributes.
cmp.find("div1").getElement()
Returns the DOM element for the div as c:domLocker created the div.
event.getSource().get("v.name")
Returns the name of the button that dispatched the event; in this case, myButton.
Notice the complete absence of query selectors in the enumeration of valid methods to access the DOM. It's not a supported approach, strictly speaking, even if it may work today.
answered Nov 21 at 17:02
Adrian Larson♦
103k19111233
103k19111233
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Salesforce Stack Exchange!
- 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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsalesforce.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f240146%2fdocument-getelementbyidmyid-vs-component-findmyid-getelement%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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