Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
jquery vs cash
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Cash Get ID vs Cash Get Text vs Cash Get Html vs jQuery Get ID vs jQuery Get Text vs jQuery Get Html
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.4.1/jquery.min.js"><script> <script> jQuery.noConflict(); </script> <script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/cash/4.1.4/cash.min.js"></script> <div id="foo">Hello World</div>
Tests:
Cash Get ID
var text = $("#foo");
Cash Get Text
var text = $("#foo").text();
Cash Get Html
var text = $("#foo").html();
jQuery Get ID
var text = jQuery("#foo");
jQuery Get Text
var text = jQuery("#foo").text();
jQuery Get Html
var text = jQuery("#foo").html();
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (6)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Cash Get ID
Cash Get Text
Cash Get Html
jQuery Get ID
jQuery Get Text
jQuery Get Html
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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks. **Benchmark Overview** The provided JSON represents a benchmark comparison between two popular JavaScript libraries: jQuery and Cash. The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of each library when executing specific methods (get ID, get text, and get HTML) on an element with the id "foo". **Options Compared** The options being compared are: 1. **jQuery**: A widely-used JavaScript library for DOM manipulation. 2. **Cash**: A lightweight alternative to jQuery, designed to be faster and more efficient. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **jQuery**: + Pros: Large community support, extensive documentation, and a wide range of features (but also heavier and slower). + Cons: Steeper learning curve due to its complexity, larger bundle size, and potential security vulnerabilities. * **Cash**: + Pros: Smaller bundle size, faster execution times, and fewer dependencies. + Cons: Smaller community support, limited documentation, and less feature-rich compared to jQuery. **Library Overview** * **jQuery**: The original JavaScript library for DOM manipulation. It provides a vast array of features for selecting and manipulating elements, as well as events handling and animation capabilities. * **Cash**: A lightweight alternative to jQuery, designed to provide fast and efficient DOM manipulation without the overhead of jQuery's extensive feature set. **Special JS Features or Syntax** None mentioned in this benchmark. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The HTML preparation code includes two scripts: 1. jQuery is loaded from a CDN, along with its noConflict method to ensure compatibility with other libraries. 2. Cash is loaded from a CDN, without any additional setup or configuration. **Other Alternatives** * **Lodash**: A popular utility library that provides functional programming features and can be used in conjunction with either jQuery or Cash for DOM manipulation. * **PureScript**: A statically typed JavaScript alternative to traditional JavaScript, which could potentially offer better performance compared to dynamic libraries like jQuery or Cash. * **Native DOM API**: Using native DOM APIs without the need for a library like jQuery or Cash. This approach eliminates the overhead of an external library but requires more expertise and can be slower. Overall, this benchmark provides valuable insights into the relative performance of jQuery and Cash when executing common JavaScript tasks.
Related benchmarks:
jQuery VS Cash New
Vanilla vs Cash vs jQuery vs Sprint Library Speed Test
Vanilla JS, Cash, jQuery and Umbrella - GetID Speed Test
Cash VS Umbrella VS jquery VS vanilla selectors
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?