Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
jQuery.is perf test
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
jQuery vs native
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.2.1/jquery.min.js"></script> <img id="el">
Script Preparation code:
var $el = $("#el"); var el = $el.get(0);
Tests:
jQuery
var b = $el.is('img');
native
var a = el.nodeName === 'IMG';
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
jQuery
native
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):
I'll break down the provided benchmark definition, test cases, and latest benchmark results to explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: using jQuery's `is()` method and native JavaScript's equality check (`nodeName === 'IMG'`). The script preparation code includes a jQuery reference and an HTML image element with an ID `"el"`. This setup allows the benchmark to test the performance of each approach. **Options being compared** Two options are being compared: 1. **jQuery**: The `is()` method is used to check if the element matches a specific node name or selector. 2. **Native JavaScript**: A direct equality check using the `nodeName` property is used to verify if the element's node type is `'IMG'`. **Pros and Cons of each approach** * **jQuery's `is()` method**: + Pros: More concise and expressive, allows for flexible matching rules (e.g., attribute checks). + Cons: Potential performance overhead due to jQuery's abstraction and additional functionality. * **Native JavaScript's equality check (`nodeName === 'IMG'`)**: + Pros: Lightweight, straightforward, and directly accesses the element's node type. + Cons: May require more boilerplate code for complex matching rules. **Library used** The benchmark uses jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling. The `is()` method is a convenience function that provides a simple way to match elements against various conditions. **Special JS feature or syntax** None are mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. **Other considerations** When writing performance benchmarks like this one, it's essential to consider factors such as: * Data size and distribution * Hardware and software configurations (e.g., device type, operating system, browser version) * Other competing workloads or library dependencies **Alternatives** If you were to rewrite this benchmark or create a new one, some alternatives to consider include: * Using a modern JavaScript alternative like React or Angular for DOM manipulation * Implementing custom equality checks using bitwise operations or regular expressions * Adding additional test cases with varying data sizes or complexities * Comparing performance under different hardware or software configurations Keep in mind that benchmarking is an iterative process, and results may vary depending on the specific use case and environment.
Related benchmarks:
jQuery 3.3.1 slim by id vs Document.getElementById
Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance 200120255
Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance(vars in prep)
Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance222
Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance12
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?