Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
1313123
(version: 0)
123123
Comparing performance of:
jquery vs vanilla
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.1/jquery.js'></script> <div class='test'></div>
Tests:
jquery
$(".test").attr('test', Math.random()).text(Math.random());
vanilla
const el = document.querySelector('.test') el.setAttribute('test', Math.random()) el.innerText = Math.random()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
jquery
vanilla
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'd be happy to explain what's being tested in the provided JSON data and discuss the pros and cons of different approaches. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is a string that represents the JavaScript code to be executed. In this case, there are two test cases: 1. `jquery`: This test case uses jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation. ```javascript $(">.test").attr('test', Math.random()).text(Math.random()); ``` This code selects an element with class `test`, sets its `test` attribute to a random value, and then sets the text content of that element to another random value. 2. `vanilla`: This test case does not use any libraries or frameworks. ```javascript const el = document.querySelector('.test') el.setAttribute('test', Math.random()) el.innerText = Math.random() ``` This code selects an element with class `test`, sets its `test` attribute to a random value, and then sets the text content of that element to another random value. **Options Compared** The two test cases are compared in terms of performance. Specifically, we're measuring the number of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond) for each browser and device platform. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of using jQuery vs. vanilla JavaScript: **jQuery:** Pros: * Easier to write DOM manipulation code * Provides a robust set of utility functions * Well-maintained and widely used Cons: * Adds an extra library dependency * Can introduce performance overhead due to its complexity * May not be as performant as native JavaScript in some cases **Vanilla JavaScript:** Pros: * Native performance and no dependencies on external libraries * Can be more efficient for simple DOM manipulation tasks * Provides a lightweight alternative to jQuery Cons: * Requires more manual effort to write similar functionality * May require additional optimization techniques to achieve comparable performance **Library (jQuery)** The `jquery` library is a JavaScript library that provides a simplified way of manipulating the Document Object Model (DOM). It's designed to make it easier to work with HTML documents and can be used for a wide range of tasks, including DOM manipulation, event handling, and AJAX requests. In this benchmark, jQuery is being used to select an element by its class, set its attribute, and update its text content. This suggests that the test case is primarily interested in measuring the performance of DOM manipulation tasks using jQuery. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the provided code snippets. However, it's worth noting that some modern JavaScript engines may introduce new language features or optimizations that could affect benchmark results. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to this benchmark, here are a few options: 1. **Lodash**: Another popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a wide range of functional programming helpers. 2. **Preact**: A lightweight alternative to React and Vue.js that can be used for building modern web applications. 3. **Native Web APIs**: Depending on the specific task, native Web APIs (e.g., `Document.querySelector()`, `Element.setAttribute()` , `Element.innerText`) may provide a more efficient way to achieve similar results. Keep in mind that each alternative has its own strengths and weaknesses, and the choice ultimately depends on your specific use case and performance requirements.
Related benchmarks:
This is a test benchmark
js vs jquery
spread vs for of
testthis
asdasdasd213423
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?