Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Jquery vs vanila
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
jquery vs vanilla
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<div id="testID">Hello World</div> <script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>
Tests:
jquery
let el = $('#testID');
vanilla
let el = document.getElementById('testID');
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'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark compares two approaches: jQuery (a JavaScript library) and vanilla JavaScript (the built-in JavaScript syntax). The test is designed to measure which approach is faster in terms of execution speed. **Options Compared** 1. **jQuery**: A popular JavaScript library that provides a set of pre-built functions for DOM manipulation, event handling, and other tasks. 2. **Vanilla JavaScript**: The native JavaScript syntax, without any additional libraries or frameworks. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** **jQuery:** Pros: * Faster execution speed due to optimized code and caching mechanisms * Easier to use, especially for simple tasks like DOM manipulation * Provides a wide range of built-in functions and methods Cons: * Adds an extra layer of complexity, as the developer needs to learn the library's API * Can be slower if not properly optimized or cached * May require additional setup and configuration **Vanilla JavaScript:** Pros: * Faster execution speed due to no overhead from a library * More control over the code, allowing for customization and optimization * No additional dependencies or configuration required Cons: * Requires more effort and knowledge of native JavaScript syntax * Can be slower if not optimized properly * May not provide the same level of functionality as jQuery **Library Used:** The test uses jQuery version 3.3.1, which is a popular and widely-used version at the time of writing. **Special JS Feature or Syntax:** None of the tests use any special JavaScript features or syntax that are not part of the standard language. Both approaches rely on native JavaScript functionality. **Other Alternatives:** If you're interested in alternative libraries or frameworks for DOM manipulation and event handling, some popular options include: * React * Angular * Vue.js * Lodash Keep in mind that each library has its own strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of which one to use depends on your specific project requirements and personal preferences. I hope this explanation helps! Let me know if you have any further questions.
Related benchmarks:
jquery vs vanilla js
reparsing jQuery speed test
Vanilla vs jQuery vs Zepto Library Speed Test
Compare jQuery 3.6.0 vs 3.2.1 performance
Compare jQuery 3.6.1 vs. 3.2.1 Performance
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?