Benchmark: jQuery 4.0.0-beta by id vs Document.getElementById

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://code.jquery.com/jquery-4.0.0-beta.min.js'></script>
<div id="testElement"></div>

Tests:

Jquery
var el = $("#testElement")[0]; var className = el.className;
Vanilla JS
var el = document.getElementById('testElement'); var className = el.className;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Jquery
Vanilla JS

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 123 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Jquery	4752361.0 Ops/sec
Vanilla JS	10371613.0 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 explain the benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing two approaches for accessing an HTML element's class name in JavaScript:

1. **jQuery**: A popular JavaScript library that provides a simplified way of interacting with HTML elements.
2. **Vanilla JS**: The standard JavaScript syntax, without using any libraries or frameworks.

**Options compared:**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches:

* jQuery (with `$(id)` syntax)
* Vanilla JS (with `document.getElementById` and then accessing `className` property)

**Pros and Cons:**

* **jQuery**:
	+ Pros:
		- Simplified way of interacting with HTML elements
		- Often faster than vanilla JS due to optimized DOM manipulation
	+ Cons:
		- Adds an extra library dependency, which can slow down initial page load
		- May not be suitable for smaller projects or those requiring fine-grained control over DOM manipulation
* **Vanilla JS**:
	+ Pros:
		- No additional library dependencies, making it a good choice for smaller projects
		- Provides more fine-grained control over DOM manipulation
	+ Cons:
		- Requires more code and syntax to achieve the same result as jQuery

**Library usage:**

The benchmark uses **jQuery**, specifically version 4.0.0-beta, which is a beta release of the upcoming major version. The `$(id)` syntax is used to select the element.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. It's focused on comparing two approaches for accessing an HTML element's class name.

**Other alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternative libraries that provide similar functionality to jQuery, some popular options include:

* **Lodash**: A utility library that provides a lot of functional programming helpers, including DOM manipulation.
* **React**: A JavaScript library for building user interfaces, which includes a DOM manipulation system called React Dom.

However, it's worth noting that these alternatives might not be as lightweight or efficient as Vanilla JS for simple DOM manipulation tasks.

Related benchmarks:

jQuery 4.0.0-beta by id vs Document.getElementById (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Jquery vs Vanilla JS

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Jquery

Vanilla JS

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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