Benchmark: promise vs jquery promive

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script>

Tests:

promise
const p = new Promise((resolve) => { setTimeout(() => { resolve(1) }, 500) }) p.then((result) => { console.log(result) })
jquery
const dfd = new $.Deferred(); setTimeout(() => { dfd.resolve(1) }, 500) $.when(dfd).then((result) => { console.log(result) })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
promise
jquery

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
promise	480630.2 Ops/sec
jquery	20631.2 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 you understand the JavaScript microbenchmark at MeasureThat.net.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches: using Promises and using jQuery's Deferred object (specifically, $.Deferred) to resolve asynchronous code. The goal is to measure which approach performs better in terms of execution speed.

**Options Compared**

There are only two options being compared:

1. **Promise**: Using a native Promise object to create a new promise that can be resolved or rejected after a certain amount of time.
2. **jQuery Deferred**: Using jQuery's Deferred object to create a deferred object that can be used to resolve asynchronous code.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

**Promise**

Pros:

* Native JavaScript support, which means it's likely to work in all browsers.
* More concise and expressive syntax.
* Can be chained together for more complex asynchronous operations.

Cons:

* May require additional setup or configuration if not used correctly.
* Some older browsers may not support Promises natively (although they may be supported through polyfills).

**jQuery Deferred**

Pros:

* Wide browser support, as it's part of the jQuery library.
* Easy to use and understand for developers familiar with jQuery.
* Can be used in conjunction with other jQuery methods.

Cons:

* Requires jQuery to be included as a script tag in the HTML file.
* More verbose syntax compared to Promises.

**Library: jQuery Deferred**

In this benchmark, `$.Deferred` is used as part of the jQuery library. A deferred object is a way to manage asynchronous operations and handle their resolution or rejection in a more elegant and flexible way. It's essentially a container for promises that can be resolved or rejected after some time has passed.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark, apart from the use of Promises and jQuery Deferred objects, which are both part of the standard language.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to promises or jQuery Deferred, here are a few options:

* **Async/Await**: A newer feature in JavaScript that allows writing asynchronous code that's easier to read and maintain.
* **RxJS (Reactive Extensions)**: A library that provides observables for handling asynchronous data streams.
* **Cooperative scheduling libraries**: Such as `co` or `bluebird`, which provide more advanced cooperative scheduling capabilities.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different trade-offs in terms of complexity, performance, and compatibility.

Related benchmarks:

promise vs jquery promive (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: promise vs jquery

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

promise

jquery

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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