Benchmark: Jquery 3.2 vs 3.6

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.2.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq321 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.4/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq364 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<div>
  <ul id="menu">
    <li class="menu-item">1</li>
    <li class="menu-item">2</li>
    <li class="menu-item">3</li>
    <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li> 
  </ul>
</div>

Script Preparation code:

function tests($) {
    $(".menu-item").eq(2).closest("ul").css({
      "background-color": "red"
    }).parent().css({
      "border": "1px solid blue"
    }).append($("<p></p>").text("Text.").css({
      "background-color": "green"
    })).end().end().remove();
  console.log('tests' + $);
}

Tests:

321
tests($jq321);
364
tests($jq364);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
321
364

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'll break down the provided benchmark definition, script preparation code, and test cases to help explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The website uses JSON data to define a JavaScript microbenchmarking framework. The "Name" field specifies that the benchmark is comparing jQuery 3.2 with jQuery 3.6.

**Script Preparation Code:**

The provided script preparation code demonstrates how to set up and run each test case. It creates two variables, `$jq321` and `$jq364`, which reference jQuery versions 3.2 and 3.6, respectively, using the `$.noConflict(true)` method to reset the global jQuery context.

**Html Preparation Code:**

The HTML preparation code provides a simple webpage with an unordered list (`<ul>`) containing multiple list items (`<li>`). This HTML structure is used as a test fixture for each benchmarking test case.

**Individual Test Cases:**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **Test Case "321":**
	* The `Benchmark Definition` specifies the script to run, which calls the `tests($jq321)` function.
	* The `Test Name` is "321", indicating that this test case is using jQuery version 3.2 (as indicated by `$jq321`).
2. **Test Case "364":**
	* Similar to Test Case "321", but with a different script definition and `$.noConflict(true)` method, which references jQuery version 3.6 (`$jq364`).

**Pro and Cons of Different Approaches:**

Using jQuery versions in separate test cases (e.g., `$jq321` and `$jq364`) provides:

Pros:

* Allows for direct comparison between the two versions.
* Simplifies testing by isolating specific features or behaviors.

Cons:

* May introduce additional overhead due to context switching between different global variables ($jq321 vs. $jq364).

**Other Considerations:**

1. **Library Usage:** The tests use jQuery, a widely used JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling. Its presence is essential for running the test cases.
2. **Special JS Features or Syntax:** There are no special features or syntax specific to these benchmarks that require explanation.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives for benchmarking JavaScript performance might include:

1. V8 Benchmark Suite (Chrome-specific)
2. Node.js Perf
3. jsperf (now archived, but still available for reference)
4. Benchmark.js

Keep in mind that each alternative has its strengths and weaknesses, and some may be better suited to specific use cases or platforms.

By understanding the structure of this benchmark definition, script preparation code, and test cases, software engineers can effectively analyze and reproduce these tests to compare performance between different JavaScript versions or implementations.

Related benchmarks:

Jquery 3.2 vs 3.6 (version: 0)

Check speed

Comparing performance of: 321 vs 364

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

321

364

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):