Benchmark: jQuery 3.5 versus 3.1

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.1.0.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq31 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.5.0.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq35 = $.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.").css({
      "background-color": "green"
    })).end().end().remove();
  console.log('tests' + $);
}

Tests:

3.1
tests($jq31);
3.5
tests($jq35);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
3.1
3.5

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 132 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
3.1	16827.2 Ops/sec
3.5	14909.1 Ops/sec

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 Definition**

The benchmark is comparing two versions of jQuery, version 3.1 (`$jq31`) and version 3.5 (`$jq35`). The script preparation code is the same for both versions, but there's a key difference in how the libraries are loaded.

In the HTML Preparation Code, two instances of jQuery are loaded:

* `https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.1.0.min.js` (version 3.1) with `$jq31`
* `https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.5.0.min.js` (version 3.5) with `$jq35`

The script preparation code uses the `$noConflict(true)` method to disable the conflict between multiple versions of jQuery. This is necessary because when you load two or more versions of jQuery, they may have different function names and methods, which can lead to conflicts.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, we're comparing the performance differences between using jQuery version 3.1 and version 3.5.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

Using multiple versions of jQuery can be beneficial if you need specific features or compatibility with older browsers. However, it also introduces complexity and potential conflicts between different versions.

On the other hand, using a single version of jQuery can simplify your code and reduce conflicts, but it may limit your ability to use specific features from older versions.

**Library and Its Purpose**

The `$.noConflict()` method is used to disable the conflict between multiple versions of jQuery. It returns a new jQuery object that doesn't clash with the original jQuery object, allowing you to safely load multiple versions of jQuery without conflicts.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There's no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The script preparation code uses the `$` notation to refer to the jQuery library, but it's a standard way of using jQuery and doesn't require any special knowledge.

**Other Alternatives**

If you don't need to use jQuery, there are alternative libraries available that offer similar functionality, such as:

* Lodash: A utility library that provides functions for common tasks, like array manipulation and string formatting.
* Moment.js: A date and time library that provides features like date parsing and formatting.
* React or Angular: JavaScript libraries for building user interfaces and managing state.

However, these alternatives are typically used in different contexts and may not be directly comparable to jQuery in this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

jQuery 3.5 versus 3.1 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 3.1 vs 3.5

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

3.1

3.5

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):