Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Jquery selectors test 1.
(version: 2)
Comparing performance of:
Single selector vs Double selector vs ID selector vs Prefixed selector
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script> <div> </div> <div> <div class="main"> <div class="red" id="neo"> </div> </div> </div>
Tests:
Single selector
for(i=0; i<1000; i++){ $(".red"); }
Double selector
for(i=0; i<1000; i++){ $(".main .red"); }
ID selector
for(i=0; i<1000; i++){ $("#neo"); }
Prefixed selector
for(i=0; i<1000; i++){ $("div.red"); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Single selector
Double selector
ID selector
Prefixed selector
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark data and explain what's being tested. **Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided JSON data represents a benchmark with four test cases, each testing different aspects of jQuery selector performance in a web browser. **Benchmark Structure** The benchmark consists of two main parts: 1. **Script Preparation Code**: This section contains the HTML code used to prepare the test environment. In this case, it includes a reference to jQuery and a simple HTML structure with a div element containing another div element with multiple classes (main, red) and an ID (neo). 2. **Individual Test Cases**: Each test case is defined in the "Benchmark Definition" section, which specifies a JavaScript code snippet that performs a specific operation using jQuery selectors. **Test Cases** The four individual test cases are: 1. **Single selector**: `$(\".red\");` * This test case uses a single class selector to select an element with the class "red". 2. **Double selector**: `$(\".main .red\");` * This test case uses a double-class selector to select an element that has both classes "main" and "red". 3. **ID selector**: `$(\"#neo\");` * This test case uses an ID selector to select the element with the ID "neo". 4. **Prefixed selector**: `$(\"div.red\");` * This test case uses a prefixed class selector (with the "div." prefix) to select an element that has the class "red". **Library and Purpose** In all four test cases, jQuery is used as the library. jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation and provides a way to select elements in the document. **Special JavaScript Features or Syntax** None of the provided benchmark test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond basic DOM manipulation with jQuery selectors. **Options Compared** The four test cases compare the performance of different types of jQuery selectors: 1. **Single class selector**: `$(\".red\");` 2. **Double-class selector**: `$(\".main .red\");` 3. **ID selector**: `$(\"#neo\");` 4. **Prefixed class selector**: `$(\"div.red\");` **Pros and Cons of Different Approaches** Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach: 1. **Single class selector**: Fastest, as it only requires traversing the DOM to find the element. 2. **Double-class selector**: Generally slower than single-class selectors, as it requires more DOM traversal. 3. **ID selector**: Faster than double-class selectors, but can be slower than single-class selectors if the ID is not unique. 4. **Prefixed class selector**: May be slower due to the additional prefix required for the browser's CSS resolution mechanism. **Other Considerations** When comparing these approaches, it's essential to consider factors like: * DOM size and complexity * Browser version and engine * Cacheability and caching strategies Keep in mind that this benchmark is designed to compare specific aspects of jQuery selector performance. In real-world scenarios, other factors may come into play. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for testing jQuery selector performance or comparing different CSS resolution mechanisms include: * Other JavaScript libraries like React or Angular, which might have optimized CSS resolution implementations. * WebPageTest or Lighthouse, tools that provide more comprehensive performance and accessibility analysis. * Browser-specific benchmarking tools, such as Safari's Benchmarking Suite or Chrome's DevTools Performance.
Related benchmarks:
jQuery Selector
Find vs select
jQuery Selector v2
jQuery Selector v3
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?