Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
$.trim() vs .trim()
(version: 0)
jQuery trim vs browser trim
Comparing performance of:
$.trim() vs trim()
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script> <div id='text'> text </div>
Tests:
$.trim()
$.trim(document.getElementById('text').textContent)
trim()
document.getElementById('text').textContent.trim()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
$.trim()
trim()
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested. **What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches to trimming strings: using jQuery's `$.trim()` method versus the built-in string `trim()` method in JavaScript. **Options being compared** There are two options being compared: 1. **jQuery's `$.trim()`**: This method is part of the jQuery library, which provides a set of DOM manipulation and event handling methods. The `$.trim()` function removes whitespace from the start and end of a string. 2. **Built-in JavaScript string `trim()` method**: This is a native JavaScript method that also removes whitespace from the start and end of a string. **Pros and Cons** * **jQuery's `$.trim()`**: + Pros: jQuery is widely used, and its DOM manipulation methods are often included in projects by default. Using jQuery's `$.trim()` might simplify code and reduce dependencies. + Cons: Using an external library can add overhead due to loading and parsing the library's code. Additionally, using a library's method might lead to security vulnerabilities if not used properly. * **Built-in JavaScript string `trim()` method**: + Pros: This is a native method that doesn't require any external dependencies or libraries, making it potentially faster and more lightweight. + Cons: If not implemented correctly, the built-in `trim()` method might have issues with handling certain edge cases. **Other considerations** * **Library usage**: The benchmark uses jQuery's library. In general, using libraries can add overhead due to loading and parsing the code, but it also simplifies development by providing a set of pre-built functions. * **Native JavaScript methods**: Using native JavaScript methods like `trim()` can be more efficient since they don't require any external dependencies or libraries. **Special JS feature or syntax** None are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. However, using jQuery's `$.trim()` method introduces some nuances: * The `.` notation is used to access the library's functions and methods. * The `$` symbol represents the jQuery object, which provides a set of DOM manipulation and event handling methods. **Other alternatives** If you're looking for alternative approaches to trimming strings, here are a few options: 1. **Using a regular expression**: You can use a regular expression like `/^\s+|\s+$/.replace(/^(?:\r\n|[\n\r])?/gm, '')` to remove whitespace from the start and end of a string. 2. **Using a custom implementation**: Depending on your specific requirements, you might need to implement a custom trimming function that handles specific edge cases or formatting. Keep in mind that this benchmark is focused on comparing jQuery's `$.trim()` method versus the built-in JavaScript string `trim()` method, so other alternatives are not being tested here.
Related benchmarks:
trim test
trim-loadsh vs native-trim
trim-loadsh vs native-trim1
innerText vs textContent + trim (HTML)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?