Benchmark: jquery vs js classList

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>
	
<div id='el'></div>

Script Preparation code:

$('#el').addClass('red');

Tests:

jquery and js
$('#el')[0].classList.add('red');
js
document.getElementById('el').classList.add('red');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jquery and js
js

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; rv:136.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/136.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 136 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jquery and js	1953840.4 Ops/sec
js	1817418.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help explain the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches: using jQuery's `addClass` method and using JavaScript's native `classList.add` method on an HTML element.

**What is tested?**

In this benchmark, we're testing how long it takes for each approach to add a class "red" to an HTML element (`<div id="el">`) that has been previously loaded with jQuery. The test cases are:

1. `$('#el')[0].classList.add('red');`: This uses jQuery's `addClass` method.
2. `document.getElementById('el').classList.add('red');`: This uses JavaScript's native `classList.add` method.

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

* Using jQuery's `addClass` method
* Using JavaScript's native `classList.add` method

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **jQuery's `addClass` method:**
	* Pros:
		+ Easier to use, especially for developers familiar with jQuery.
		+ Provides a convenient way to add classes to elements without having to manually set the class attribute.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires including an extra library (jQuery) which can increase page load time and reduce performance.
		+ Can be slower than native JavaScript methods due to the overhead of jQuery's DOM manipulation.
2. **JavaScript's `classList.add` method:**
	* Pros:
		+ Faster execution, as it doesn't require loading an external library.
		+ More efficient, as it directly manipulates the element's class attribute without unnecessary DOM reflows.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires a basic understanding of JavaScript and its built-in DOM methods.
		+ Can be more error-prone if not used correctly.

**Library used**

The `jquery.js` library is loaded in the HTML preparation code, which is required for the jQuery-based test case. The library provides a convenient API for working with HTML elements and DOM manipulation.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark, as both approaches rely on standard JavaScript concepts like `classList` and `document.getElementById`.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to add more test cases or consider alternative approaches, some possibilities could include:

* Using other DOM manipulation libraries like React or Angular.
* Utilizing CSS classes instead of `classList.add`.
* Comparing the performance of different version of jQuery or JavaScript engines.

Keep in mind that this benchmark is primarily focused on comparing the performance of two specific approaches, rather than exploring a wide range of alternatives.

Related benchmarks:

jquery vs js classList (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: jquery and js vs js

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jquery and js

js

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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