Benchmark: jQuery vs JS Vanilla

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.0/jquery.min.js"></script>
<label for="pseudo">Pseudo</label><input type="text" name="pseudo" id="pseudo">

Tests:

javascript
let pseudo = document.querySelector("#pseudo"); pseudo.value="aaa" let saisie = pseudo.value; if(saisie.length < 5){ pseudo.style.border = "2px solid red"; }else{ pseudo.style.border = "2px solid green"; }
jquery
let pseudo = $("#pseudo"); pseudo.val("aaa"); let saisie = pseudo.val(); if(saisie.length < 5){ pseudo.css("border", "2px solid red"); }else{ pseudo.css("border", "2px solid green"); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
javascript
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its options.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a microbenchmarking test between two approaches: JavaScript Vanilla and jQuery. The test is designed to measure the performance of these two approaches when updating the value of an HTML input field's value attribute, applying a CSS style border conditionally based on the length of the new value.

**Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **JavaScript Vanilla**: This test case uses pure JavaScript syntax without any external libraries. It updates the value of the `pseudo` element using the `document.querySelector()` and `value` properties, then checks if the length of the new value is less than 5. If so, it sets a CSS border style to red; otherwise, it sets it to green.
2. **jQuery**: This test case uses the jQuery library to update the value of the `pseudo` element using the `$()` function and the `val()` method, then checks if the length of the new value is less than 5. If so, it sets a CSS border style to red; otherwise, it sets it to green.

**Library and Its Purpose**

In the jQuery test case, the `jQuery` library is used for its convenience functions like `$()`, `val()`, and `css()`. These functions simplify DOM manipulation and styling operations, making it easier to write code that is both efficient and readable.

**JavaScript Features/ Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. Both test cases use standard JavaScript syntax and do not rely on any experimental or newly introduced features.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare the performance of JavaScript Vanilla and jQuery when:

1. Updating the value of an HTML input field.
2. Applying a CSS style border conditionally based on the length of the new value.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **JavaScript Vanilla**:
	+ Pros: No external dependencies, pure JavaScript implementation, easy to understand.
	+ Cons: More verbose code, potentially slower due to additional DOM manipulations.
* **jQuery**:
	+ Pros: Convenient functions for DOM manipulation and styling, often faster performance due to optimized code.
	+ Cons: External dependency, more complex code structure, potential security risks if not used properly.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative libraries or approaches, here are a few options:

* **Lodash**: A utility library that provides functions for common tasks like DOM manipulation and styling. It can be used as an alternative to jQuery.
* **Vanilla-HTML-CSS**: A set of pure JavaScript libraries that provide functions for DOM manipulation and styling. They can be used as an alternative to jQuery.

**Benchmark Considerations**

When interpreting benchmark results, consider the following factors:

* **Device Platform and Operating System**: The provided benchmark results are from a Chrome 89 browser on Windows Desktop. Results may vary across different platforms and browsers.
* **Execution Frequency**: The test case runs at a high frequency (218479.609375 executions per second for JavaScript Vanilla). This can impact the accuracy of the benchmark results, especially if the code is not optimized for performance.
* **Code Optimization**: Both test cases are relatively simple and do not require significant optimization. However, more complex code structures or additional dependencies may affect the performance differences between the two approaches.

I hope this explanation helps you understand the provided benchmarking test!

Related benchmarks:

jQuery vs JS Vanilla (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: javascript vs jquery

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

javascript

jquery

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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