Benchmark: JQuery version speed test (2.2.4 vs 3.3.1 vs 3.4.1)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/2.2.4/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq224 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq331 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src='https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.4.1/jquery.min.js'></script>
<script>
  var $jq341 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<div>
  <ul id="menu">
    <li class="menu-item">1</li>
    <li class="menu-item">2</li>
    <li class="menu-item">3</li>
    <li class="menu-item">4</li>  
  </ul>
</div>

Script Preparation code:

function tests($) {
    $(".menu-item").eq(2).closest("ul").css({
      "background-color": "red"
    }).parent().css({
      "border": "1px solid blue"
    }).append($("<p></p>").text("Text.")).end().end().remove();
}

Tests:

$jq341
tests($jq341);
$jq224
tests($jq224);
$jq331
tests($jq331);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
$jq341
$jq224
$jq331

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 dive into explaining the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of jQuery versions 2.2.4, 3.3.1, and 3.4.1 on a Windows desktop using Chrome 94 browser.

**Tested Options**

The benchmark compares the execution speed of three different jQuery versions:

1. **jQuery 2.2.4**: The oldest version in the comparison.
2. **jQuery 3.3.1**: A middle-aged version, still widely used for compatibility reasons.
3. **jQuery 3.4.1**: The latest version tested.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

1. **Using older versions (2.2.4)**:
	* Pros: May be more compatible with older browsers or legacy codebases.
	* Cons: Less efficient, may have more bugs and security vulnerabilities.
2. **Using a middle-aged version (3.3.1)**:
	* Pros: Balances compatibility and performance.
	* Cons: May not be the latest feature-rich version.
3. **Using the latest version (3.4.1)**:
	* Pros: Latest features, better performance, and security.
	* Cons: May break existing code or require more testing.

**Library: jQuery**

jQuery is a popular JavaScript library used for DOM manipulation, event handling, and AJAX requests. Its primary purpose is to simplify the process of interacting with HTML documents in web browsers.

In this benchmark, each test case uses jQuery as the underlying library. The `$.noConflict(true)` method is used to ensure that each version has its own namespace, avoiding conflicts between versions.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The test code uses some specific features:

1. **`.closest()`**: A jQuery method that traverses the DOM tree to find an ancestor matching a selector.
2. **`$.noConflict(true)`**: A method used to assign multiple versions of jQuery to different variables, preventing conflicts.

**Other Alternatives**

For benchmarking JavaScript libraries like jQuery, other alternatives include:

1. **Benchmark.js**: A popular benchmarking library for Node.js and browser environments.
2. **JSPerf**: A web-based tool for measuring the performance of JavaScript code snippets.
3. **Google's Closure Compiler**: A source map generator that can be used to measure performance differences.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own strengths, weaknesses, and use cases.

Related benchmarks:

JQuery version speed test (2.2.4 vs 3.3.1 vs 3.4.1) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: $jq341 vs $jq224 vs $jq331

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

$jq341

$jq224

$jq331

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):