Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
class selector
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
VanillaJS vs Jquery
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<div class="test22"></div> <script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>
Tests:
VanillaJS
document.getElementsByClassName('test22')[0];
Jquery
$('.test22')
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
VanillaJS
Jquery
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is testing the performance of two different approaches to select an HTML element by its class name: 1. **VanillaJS**: The `document.getElementsByClassName('test22')[0];` approach, which uses the native JavaScript method to retrieve elements with a specific class name. 2. **Jquery**: The `$('.test22')` approach, which uses the jQuery library to select the same element. **Options Compared** The two approaches differ in the following aspects: * **Libraries used**: VanillaJS relies solely on native JavaScript, while Jquery uses an external library to achieve the same result. * **Syntax and semantics**: The syntax for both approaches is different. VanillaJS uses a more traditional method with `getElementsByClassName`, while Jquery uses a query language-like approach with `$()`. * **Implementation details**: Jquery's implementation likely involves creating a DOM node tree and traversing it to find the matching element, whereas VanillaJS directly accesses the document's internal data structures. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: **VanillaJS:** Pros: * No external dependencies * Native JavaScript performance is often optimized for performance-critical code paths * Can be useful for educational purposes or when a lightweight solution is required Cons: * May require more explicit DOM manipulation * Might not take advantage of browser-specific optimizations **Jquery:** Pros: * High-level, query language-like syntax can simplify the selection process * Often comes with additional features and methods that make it easier to work with elements * Can provide better performance in some cases due to optimized internal algorithms Cons: * Adds an external dependency (the jQuery library) * May introduce unnecessary overhead or bloat if not properly optimized * Can lead to less direct control over the DOM tree for those unfamiliar with its inner workings. **Other Considerations** 1. **Browser Support**: Both approaches should work across a wide range of browsers, but it's always good to test specific versions or edge cases. 2. **Security**: Be mindful of potential security vulnerabilities when using external libraries like jQuery. 3. **Readability and Maintainability**: Choose the approach that best aligns with your coding style and team preferences. **Library (Jquery) and its Purpose** jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation, event handling, and other common web development tasks. It's designed to provide a more convenient, intuitive API for working with HTML elements. In this benchmark, jQuery is used to select the `test22` element by its class name. **Special JS Features or Syntax** This benchmark doesn't explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanation. However, some edge cases might require consideration of browser-specific behavior or nuances in the selection process.
Related benchmarks:
vanilla vs jquery tests
vanilla vs jquery test 2
test11146
jquery 3.6.0
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?