Benchmark: Compare jQuery 3.6.0 vs 3.2.1 performance

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.6.0.js'></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
  var jq331 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.2.1/jquery.js'></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
  var jq214 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<div id="testElement"></div>

Tests:

jQuery 3.6.0
var element = jq331('#testElement'); element.removeClass('test-class'); element.addClass('test-class'); element.removeClass('test-class');
jQuery 3.2.1
var element = jq214('#testElement'); element.removeClass('test-class'); element.addClass('test-class'); element.removeClass('test-class');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jQuery 3.6.0
jQuery 3.2.1

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/128.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 128 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jQuery 3.6.0	345901.5 Ops/sec
jQuery 3.2.1	357905.3 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in the provided JSON.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two versions of jQuery, specifically:

* jQuery 3.6.0
* jQuery 3.2.1

The script preparation code loads both versions of jQuery and initializes them with `$.noConflict(true)`, which allows us to use `$` as a global variable without conflicts.

**Script Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code sets up a basic HTML structure with an empty `<div>` element, which will be used as the target element for the benchmarking test. The script tags load both versions of jQuery.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **jQuery 3.6.0**
	* The benchmark definition is:
```javascript
var element = jq331('#testElement');
element.removeClass('test-class');
element.addClass('test-class');
element.removeClass('test-class');
```
This code uses jQuery 3.6.0 (denoted by `jq331`) to remove and add a class called "test-class" from the `<div>` element.

2. **jQuery 3.2.1**
	* The benchmark definition is:
```javascript
var element = jq214('#testElement');
element.removeClass('test-class');
element.addClass('test-class');
element.removeClass('test-class');
```
This code uses jQuery 3.2.1 (denoted by `jq214`) to perform the same operations as the previous test case.

**Comparison**

The comparison is between the two versions of jQuery, specifically in terms of their performance when executing this particular benchmarking test.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Using a specific version of jQuery:**
	+ Pros:
		- Ensures consistency across different versions.
		- Reduces the impact of version-specific bugs or quirks.
	+ Cons:
		- May limit the benchmark's relevance to other environments using different versions.
		- Can be less representative of real-world scenarios.
* **Using `$` as a global variable:**
	+ Pros:
		- Simplifies code and reduces conflicts between libraries.
	+ Cons:
		- May lead to subtle performance differences due to the use of `$.noConflict()`

**Other Considerations:**

* **Browser and device support:** The benchmark is run on Chrome 128, which may not be representative of other browsers or devices.
* **Optimization techniques:** The code does not appear to include any optimization techniques, such as caching or memoization, which could impact performance.

**Alternatives:**

* Other microbenchmarks that compare different JavaScript libraries or frameworks.
* Benchmarks that test specific features or syntax in modern JavaScript (e.g., async/await, classes, or modules).
* Larger-scale benchmarks that simulate real-world scenarios, such as loading and rendering large datasets.

Related benchmarks:

Compare jQuery 3.6.0 vs 3.2.1 performance (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: jQuery 3.6.0 vs jQuery 3.2.1

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jQuery 3.6.0

jQuery 3.2.1

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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