Benchmark: Jquery versions Benchmarch Mehman

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="idSelector"></div>
<div class="classSelector"></div>
<ul id="iteration">
    <li></li>
    <li></li>
    <li></li>
    <li></li>
    <li></li>
    <li></li>
    <li></li>
    <li></li>
    <li></li>
    <li></li>
</ul>
<div id="cssGetter" style="color: black;"></div>
<div id="cssSetter" style="color: black;"></div>
<div id="find">
    <span></span>
    <div>
        <strong></strong>
    </div>
</div>

<script type="text/javascript" src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.min.js">
</script>
<script>
  var $jq18 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>

<script type="text/javascript" src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.0/jquery.min.js">
</script>
<script>
  var $jq19 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>

<script type="text/javascript" src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.2/jquery.min.js">
</script>
<script>
  var $jq112 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.6.4/jquery.min.js">
</script>
<script>
  var $jq224 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.7.0/jquery.min.js">
</script>
<script>
  var $jq321 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>

Script Preparation code:

function tests($) {
  // Filter Next
  $('#iteration li').filter(':first').next();
  
  // Filter Prev
  $('#iteration li').filter(':last').prev();
  
  // Non-existant Class
  $('.someClass');
  
  // Non-existant ID
  $('#someID');
  
  // Find
  $('#find').find('strong');
  
  // Set color
  $('#cssSetter').css('color', 'red');
  
  // Get color
  $('#cssGetter').css('color');
  
  // Iteration
  $('#iteration li').each(function(i, e) {
    i++;
  });
  
  // Class selector
  $('.classSelector');
  
  // ID selector
  $('#idSelector');
}

Tests:

1.8.3
tests($jq18);
1.9.1
tests($jq18);
1.12.14
tests($jq112);
2.2.4
tests($jq224);
3.2.1
tests($jq321);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1.8.3
1.9.1
1.12.14
2.2.4
3.2.1

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.

Let's break down the provided benchmark data and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Script Preparation Code` section defines a JavaScript function called `tests($)`, which takes a jQuery object as an argument. This function contains multiple test cases that exercise various aspects of jQuery, such as:

* Filtering elements (`#iteration li`.filter(':first').next();`)
* Selecting non-existent classes or IDs (`$('.someClass');`, `$('#someID');`)
* Finding and manipulating element content (`$('#find').find('strong');`, `$('#cssSetter').css('color', 'red');`)
* Setting and getting CSS styles (`$('#cssGetter').css('color');`)
* Iterating over elements (`$('#iteration li').each(function(i, e) { i++; });`)

The `Html Preparation Code` section sets up the HTML structure for these test cases, including multiple lists, divs, and elements with IDs or classes that are used in the test cases.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, four different jQuery versions are being compared:

1. `$jq18` (jQuery 3.3.1)
2. `$jq19` (jQuery 3.6.0)
3. `$jq112` (jQuery 1.12.14)
4. `$jq224` (jQuery 2.2.4)

Each test case uses a different jQuery version, and the benchmark measures the execution time for each test case.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

Here are some pros and cons of using different JavaScript engines or libraries:

* **V8 JavaScript Engine**: Pros: fast, efficient, and widely used; Cons: can be sensitive to garbage collection and other performance optimizations.
* **jQuery**: Pros: provides a convenient and consistent API for DOM manipulation; Cons: can introduce overhead due to its own implementation and dependencies.

In this benchmark, the jQuery versions being compared are optimized for different use cases:

* `$jq18` (3.3.1) is an older version that may be slower than newer versions but still suitable for specific use cases.
* `$jq19` (3.6.0) is a more recent version with various performance optimizations and new features.
* `$jq112` (1.12.14) is an older version of jQuery, which can provide different results due to changes in the underlying V8 engine.

**Latest Benchmark Results**

The latest benchmark results show the execution times for each test case on a Chrome 113 browser running on Windows desktop:

| TestName | ExecutionsPerSecond |
| --- | --- |
| 1.9.1 | 32230.85546875 |
| 1.8.3 | 32180.396484375 |
| 3.2.1 | 29147.3046875 |
| 2.2.4 | 29114.41796875 |
| 1.12.14 | 22906.18359375 |

These results indicate that the newer jQuery versions ($jq19 and $jq224) are generally faster than older versions ($jq18, $jq112), which is expected due to ongoing performance optimizations.

Overall, this benchmark provides valuable insights into the performance characteristics of different jQuery versions on a specific browser platform.

Related benchmarks:

Jquery versions Benchmarch Mehman (version: 0)

SImple benchmark of jQuery versions

Comparing performance of: 1.8.3 vs 1.9.1 vs 1.12.14 vs 2.2.4 vs 3.2.1

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

1.8.3

1.9.1

1.12.14

2.2.4

3.2.1

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):