Benchmark: jQuery vs HE (html entities) lib

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/jquery@2.2.4/dist/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/he@1.2.0/he.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var testVal = "a&quot;s&quot;d &amp; qwe";

Tests:

jQuery
for(var i = 0; i<10; i++){ $('<div/>').html(testVal).text(); }
HE
for(var i = 0; i<10; i++){ he.decode(testVal); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jQuery
HE

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 the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two JavaScript libraries: jQuery and html entities library (HE). The goal is to measure how fast each library can process a specific test case, which involves encoding and decoding HTML entities.

**Options Compared**

There are only two options compared in this benchmark:

1. **jQuery**: A popular JavaScript library that provides a convenient way to manipulate the DOM.
2. **html entities library (HE)**: A lightweight library designed specifically for working with HTML entities.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**jQuery:**

Pros:

* Well-established and widely used, making it easy to find resources and support.
* Provides a lot of features out of the box, which can simplify development.
* Has a large community of developers who contribute to its ecosystem.

Cons:

* Can be bulky and slow compared to other libraries like HE.
* May introduce unnecessary overhead due to its extensive feature set.

**html entities library (HE):**

Pros:

* Extremely lightweight and optimized for performance.
* Designed specifically for working with HTML entities, making it a great choice for this particular benchmark.
* Easy to use and minimal dependencies.

Cons:

* Limited features compared to jQuery.
* May require additional setup or configuration to work with other libraries or frameworks.

**Library Usage**

The test case uses the `he` library from html entities library (HE). The `he.decode()` function is used to decode HTML entities in the `testVal` string. The `he` library is a small, lightweight library that provides functions for working with HTML entities.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

* **Benchmarking**: This benchmark uses a simple test case to compare the performance of jQuery and HE. In real-world scenarios, benchmarks may involve more complex test cases to accurately measure performance.
* **Browser and Device Variability**: The benchmark results are reported for Chrome 75 on Linux, which means that the environment might not be representative of all possible browsers or devices.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative libraries or approaches for working with HTML entities, some options include:

* `DOMPurify`: A library that provides a secure way to sanitize user-generated content.
* `js-string-escape`: A lightweight library that escapes special characters and HTML entities.
* Using built-in JavaScript methods like `String.prototype.replace()` or regular expressions (regex) to work with HTML entities.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own pros and cons, and may require additional setup or configuration to work seamlessly with your existing codebase.

Related benchmarks:

jQuery vs HE (html entities) lib (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: jQuery vs HE

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jQuery

HE

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):