Benchmark: jQuery addClass vs classList.add (only measure add)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.2.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div id="el"></div>

Script Preparation code:

document.getElementById("el").classList.remove("test");
var $el = $("#el");
var el = document.getElementById("el");

Tests:

jQuery addClass
$el.addClass("test");
Javascript classList.add
el.classList.add("test");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jQuery addClass
Javascript classList.add

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to adding a class to an HTML element: jQuery's `addClass()` method and JavaScript's built-in `classList.add()` method. The test case uses a simple scenario where an element is initially cleared of its "test" class, and then either the jQuery or vanilla JavaScript approach is used to add the class.

**Comparison Options**

The two approaches being compared are:

1. **jQuery's `addClass()` method**: This method is part of the jQuery library, which adds a class to an HTML element.
2. **JavaScript's `classList.add()` method**: This method is built into modern JavaScript engines and adds a class to an HTML element.

**Pros and Cons**

* **jQuery's `addClass()` method**:
	+ Pros: Easy to use, well-documented, and widely supported by jQuery users.
	+ Cons: Requires the jQuery library to be loaded, which can increase page load time. Additionally, this approach may not work with older browsers that don't support modern JavaScript features.
* **JavaScript's `classList.add()` method**:
	+ Pros: Native to modern JavaScript engines, doesn't require any additional libraries or load times. Also, it's a more efficient and lightweight way to add classes to elements.
	+ Cons: May not work in older browsers that don't support the `classList` API. Additionally, this approach may be less familiar to developers who are not already using modern JavaScript features.

**Library Usage**

The test case uses jQuery, which is a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation and event handling. The `addClass()` method is a part of the jQuery API, allowing developers to easily add classes to HTML elements without having to manually set the CSS.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None are mentioned in this specific benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

There are other approaches to adding classes to HTML elements, such as:

* Setting the `style` attribute using string manipulation (e.g., `"el.style.cssText = \"test\";"`)
* Using a CSS selector with the `:has()` pseudo-class (e.g., `"document.querySelectorAll(\".test\");"`)

However, these approaches are not compared in this specific benchmark.

I hope this explanation helps! Let me know if you have any further questions.

Related benchmarks:

jQuery addClass vs classList.add (only measure add) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: jQuery addClass vs Javascript classList.add

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jQuery addClass

Javascript classList.add

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):