Benchmark: jquery - zepto - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.4.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/zepto/1.2.0/zepto.min.js"></script>
<div id="foo">Hello World</div>

Tests:

jquery Get ID
var text = jQuery("#foo");
jQuery Get Text
var text = jQuery("#foo").text();
jQuery Get Html
var text = jQuery("#foo").html();
Zepto Get ID
var text = Zepto("#foo");
Zepto Get Text
var text = Zepto("#foo").text();
Zepto Get Html
var text = Zepto("#foo").html();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jquery Get ID
jQuery Get Text
jQuery Get Html
Zepto Get ID
Zepto Get Text
Zepto 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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested on the provided JSON.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two JavaScript libraries: jQuery and Zepto, specifically in terms of their DOM manipulation capabilities. The script preparation code includes links to these libraries, as well as a basic HTML structure with an ID attribute (`<div id="foo">Hello World</div>`).

**Options Compared**

Here are the options being compared:

1. `jQuery`:
	* `jquery Get ID`: Retrieving the element using its ID.
	* `jQuery Get Text`: Retrieving the text content of the element.
	* `jQuery Get Html`: Retrieving the HTML content of the element.
2. `Zepto`:
	* `Zepto Get ID`: Retrieving the element using its ID.
	* `Zepto Get Text`: Retrieving the text content of the element.
	* `Zepto Get Html`: Retrieving the HTML content of the element.

**Pros and Cons**

Each library has its own strengths and weaknesses:

1. **jQuery**:
	* Pros: Highly popular, well-documented, and widely supported. Offers a wide range of features, including event handling and animations.
	* Cons: Can be slow for small scripts and complex DOM manipulations.
2. **Zepto**:
	* Pros: Lightweight, fast, and designed specifically for mobile and web applications. Offers a more minimalist approach to DOM manipulation.
	* Cons: Less widely adopted than jQuery, with fewer features and less documentation.

**Library Libraries**

Both libraries are used extensively in web development, but they have different design goals:

1. **jQuery**: Developed by John Resig in 2006, jQuery is primarily designed for simplifying DOM manipulation, event handling, and AJAX requests.
2. **Zepto**: Created by Justin Achat, Zepto is a lightweight alternative to jQuery, focusing on speed and simplicity.

**Special JavaScript Features or Syntax**

There are no special features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The focus is solely on comparing the performance of `jQuery` and `Zepto` in executing simple DOM manipulation tasks.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're considering using other libraries for DOM manipulation, here are a few alternatives:

1. **Lodash**: A utility library that provides functions for working with arrays, objects, and DOM elements.
2. **React**: A JavaScript library for building user interfaces, which uses JSX syntax for declarative DOM rendering.
3. **VanillaJS**: Using native JavaScript functions to manipulate the DOM without any external libraries.

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives has its own strengths and weaknesses, and may not offer the same level of performance or features as `jQuery` or `Zepto`.

Related benchmarks:

jquery - zepto (version: 0)

performance

Comparing performance of: jquery Get ID vs jQuery Get Text vs jQuery Get Html vs Zepto Get ID vs Zepto Get Text vs Zepto Get Html

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jquery Get ID

jQuery Get Text

jQuery Get Html

Zepto Get ID

Zepto Get Text

Zepto Get Html

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):