Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
JS vs JQ 20.01.2021251231232
(version: 5)
Comparing performance of:
VANILA vs Jquery
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script> <div id="nhngodo" class="test">Hi! NHNgodo!</div>
Tests:
VANILA
document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function(){ console.log(1); })
Jquery
$(document).ready(function(){ console.log(2); })
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
VANILA
Jquery
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations. **Benchmark Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark in question compares two approaches: Vanilla JavaScript (without any libraries) and jQuery. **Script Preparation Code** The script preparation code provided is empty, which means the user did not add any custom setup or initialization code for the benchmark. This could be either because they didn't need it or simply because the benchmark was created with a minimalistic approach in mind. **Html Preparation Code** The html preparation code includes a reference to the jQuery library (version 3.1.1) and a simple HTML element (`<div id="nhngodo" class="test">Hi! NHNgodo!</div>`). This means that the benchmark will be executed within this specific HTML structure. **Individual Test Cases** There are two individual test cases: 1. **Vanilla**: The first test case has a JavaScript function added to the DOM using `document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', ...)` and logs the number 1 to the console. 2. **jQuery**: The second test case uses jQuery's `$` function to execute a similar script, logging the number 2 to the console. **Library: jQuery** The library used in this benchmark is jQuery, which is a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation, event handling, and other tasks. In this context, jQuery is used to simplify the execution of the script and provide additional functionality (in this case, using `$(document).ready` instead of `document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded')`. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: * **Vanilla JavaScript**: + Pros: Native JavaScript execution, no dependencies on external libraries. + Cons: Can be slower due to the overhead of the browser's JavaScript engine and DOM manipulation. * **jQuery**: + Pros: Simplifies DOM manipulation and event handling, can execute scripts more efficiently. + Cons: Adds an additional dependency on jQuery, which may not be necessary for this specific benchmark. **Other Considerations** When creating a benchmark like this, it's essential to consider the following: * **Browser and device variability**: The benchmark results are influenced by the browser version (Chrome 87) and device platform (Desktop), which could affect the performance of each approach. * **Execution frequency**: The number of executions per second is an important metric in a benchmark. In this case, jQuery performs slightly better due to its optimized execution mechanism. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for this type of benchmark could include: * Using a different JavaScript engine (e.g., V8 vs SpiderMonkey) * Adding more complex script logic or DOM manipulation * Using other libraries like React or Vue.js * Benchmarking on different devices (Mobile, Tablet)
Related benchmarks:
vanila vs jq 3.5.1
JS VS jquery 3.5.1 DOM perfomance
Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance 200120255
Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance12
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?