Benchmark: JQuery version speed test with 3.5.1

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.12.4/jquery.min.js'></script>
<script>
  var $jq1124 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<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/3.5.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq351 = $.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:

$jq1124
tests($jq1124);
$jq224
tests($jq224);
$jq331
tests($jq331);
$jq351
tests($jq351);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
$jq1124
$jq224
$jq331
$jq351

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/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
$jq1124	16454.8 Ops/sec
$jq224	19772.1 Ops/sec
$jq331	19220.2 Ops/sec
$jq351	15705.7 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 provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is to measure the performance of different jQuery versions (1.12.4, 2.2.4, 3.3.1, and 3.5.1) in a specific JavaScript microbenchmark.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines a function `tests` that takes a `$` variable as an argument. The function targets a `.menu-item` element at index 2 in the `#menu` unordered list and performs several operations on it:

1. Changes the background color of its closest `ul` element to red.
2. Changes the border style of its parent element to blue.
3. Appends a new paragraph element with the text "Text." and sets its background color to green.

The function also logs the `$` variable in the console for debugging purposes.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code loads multiple versions of jQuery (1.12.4, 2.2.4, 3.3.1, and 3.5.1) and assigns them to variables using the `$.noConflict(true)` method, which is a way to resolve conflicts between multiple versions of jQuery.

**Individual Test Cases**

The individual test cases define four separate tests:

* Each test calls the `tests` function with a different variable assignment (`$jq1124`, `$jq224`, `$jq331`, and `$jq351`).
* The variables are assigned values from the loaded jQuery versions, which determines which version is tested.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

Using multiple versions of jQuery in the same test case can lead to performance differences due to various factors such as:

1. **Version-specific optimizations**: Each version might have different optimization techniques that affect execution speed.
2. **Conflicts between versions**: Using multiple versions with `$.noConflict(true)` can introduce conflicts, which may slow down execution.
3. **Global namespace pollution**: Assigning multiple variables from the same scope (e.g., `$jq1124`, `$jq224`) might lead to name collisions and slower performance.

However, using multiple versions also allows for:

1. **Comparing version-specific behavior**: By testing different versions, you can identify which version behaves better in specific scenarios.
2. **Understanding optimization differences**: You can compare the execution speed of each version to determine which one is more efficient.

**Other Considerations**

* The use of `$.noConflict(true)` suggests that there might be conflicts between versions, but it's not explicitly mentioned in the test cases.
* There are no tests for other JavaScript libraries or frameworks that might interact with jQuery.
* No special JS features or syntax are used beyond the standard `$` variable.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you want to benchmark only one version of jQuery, you can:

1. Remove the `$.noConflict(true)` method and use a single variable assignment (e.g., `$jq351`).
2. Use a different testing framework that doesn't require loading multiple versions of jQuery.
3. Compare performance using a more focused approach, such as testing specific features or scenarios within each version.

Keep in mind that the MeasureThat.net benchmark is designed to compare multiple versions, so using alternative approaches might not provide the same level of insight into version-specific behavior.

Related benchmarks:

JQuery version speed test with 3.5.1 (version: 0)

this is an updated version of https://www.measurethat.net/Benchmarks/Show/2838/0/jquery-version-speed-test

Comparing performance of: $jq1124 vs $jq224 vs $jq331 vs $jq351

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

$jq1124

$jq224

$jq331

$jq351

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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