Benchmark: Umbrella JS 3.22 vs Jquery Slim 3.60

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.6.0.slim.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/umbrellajs"></script>
<div id="test">Test</div>

Tests:

JQuery
var test = $("#test")
Umbrella
var test = u("#test")

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JQuery
Umbrella

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JQuery	4793140.0 Ops/sec
Umbrella	1365368.4 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript benchmarks!

**What is tested?**

MeasureThat.net tests the execution speed of two JavaScript libraries: jQuery Slim and Umbrella JS. The benchmark measures how quickly these libraries can execute a specific code snippet in different browsers.

**Options compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **JQuery**: A popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling.
2. **Umbrella JS**: A lightweight alternative to jQuery, designed to be faster and more efficient.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **JQuery**:
	* Pros:
		+ Wide adoption and community support
		+ Comprehensive feature set
		+ Easy to learn and use (especially for developers familiar with jQuery)
	* Cons:
		+ Larger bundle size, which can impact page load times
		+ Can be slower than other lightweight alternatives due to its extensive feature set
2. **Umbrella JS**:
	* Pros:
		+ Smaller bundle size, making it suitable for smaller projects or faster page loads
		+ Designed to be more efficient and faster than jQuery
		+ Lightweight alternative for developers who want a faster JavaScript experience
	* Cons:
		+ Smaller community support compared to jQuery
		+ Limited feature set might not satisfy complex use cases

**Library-specific considerations:**

Both libraries are designed to manipulate the Document Object Model (DOM) and handle events. However, they differ in their implementation:

1. **JQuery**: Uses a "query" system to select elements in the DOM.
2. **Umbrella JS**: Employs a more lightweight approach using a function call (`u()`) to interact with the DOM.

**Other alternatives:**

If you're looking for other lightweight JavaScript libraries or alternatives, some popular options include:

1. **Lodash**: A utility library that provides a collection of functional programming helpers.
2. **Pico.js**: A tiny, fast, and feature-rich JavaScript library for DOM manipulation.
3. **Waypoints.js**: A lightweight library for handling smooth scrolling, animations, and other interactions.

In summary, MeasureThat.net's benchmark compares the execution speed of jQuery Slim and Umbrella JS in different browsers, highlighting their pros and cons as well as considering the implications of choosing one over the other for specific projects or performance requirements.

Related benchmarks:

Umbrella JS 3.22 vs Jquery Slim 3.60 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JQuery vs Umbrella

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JQuery

Umbrella

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):