views:

59

answers:

1

I'm trying to find some simple client-side performance tweaks in a page that receives millions of monthly pageviews. One concern that I have is the use of the CSS universal selector (*).

As an example, consider a very simple HTML document like the following:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
                      "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"&gt;
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <title>Example</title>
    <style type="text/css">
      * {
        margin: 0;
        padding: 0;
      }
  </head>
  <body>
    <h1>This is a heading</h1>
    <p>This is a paragraph of text.</p>
  </body>
</html>

The universal selector will apply the above declaration to the body, h1 and p elements, since those are the only ones in the document.

In general, would I see better performance from a rule such as:

body, h1, p {
  margin: 0;
  padding: 0;
}

Or would this have exactly the same net effect?

Essentially, what I'm asking is if these rules are effectively equivalent in this case, or if the universal selector has to perform more unnecessary work that I may not be aware of.

I realize that the performance impact in this example may be very small, but I'm hoping to learn something that may lead to more significant performance improvements in real-world situations.

Thanks for any help!


EDIT:

I might have given the impression that I intend to override the styles in the universal selector rule with other styles later in the document - i.e., using it as a quick and dirty reset stylesheet.

I'm actually trying to use the universal selector exactly as I think it's intended - to apply a ruleset to all elements in the document, once and for all.

So, ultimately, I'm hoping to determine if there is something inherently slow about the universal selector, or if it just has a bad rap due to rampant misuse. If * { margin: 0; } is literally equivalent to body, h1, p { margin: 0; }, then that will answer my question, and I'll know to go with the former since it's more concise. If not, I want to understand why the universal selector performs more slowly.

+1  A: 

Avoiding generic selectors will always speed up your page rendering. The wildcard * is slow, especially when your pages become complex nests and your element counts skyrocket.

You should always specify an ID down to the lowest level that you possibly can (I realize that this becomes near impossible especially when dealing with things like database results). But when you use selectors like

.mysuperclass ul li p a

You have a class followed by four generic selectors - that means that for each element of .mysuperclass the rendering engine has to loop through every element in that parent looking for these rules.

In short, my answer is to be as specific as possible with your CSS, and drill down as far as you can into the DOM with your selectors. Avoid wildcards and generics.

Jarrod
Thanks, Jarrod. I think I could have better emphasized in my question that I do want to target every element on the page with my CSS rule(s) - i.e., the universal selector, as I understand it, is exactly what I want in this case. Since I've also always heard the universal selector to be slow, I'm hoping to learn if that slowness is inherent to the selector, or is just based on its typical usage (e.g., a quick and dirty reset stylesheet that will be followed by styling overrides).
Bungle
I see. I would suggest doing some speed tests using Chrome's developer tools. Test it out and see the results for using the wildcard selector versus explicit tag definition. Chrome will give you a breakdown of how long each process takes.
Jarrod