Benchmark: Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance(vars in prep)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div id="nhngodo">Hi! NHNgodo!</div>

Script Preparation code:

var vel = document.getElementById("nhngodo");
var jel = $("#nhngodo");

Tests:

Vanilla JS
vel.innerText = "Hi! NHNgodo!";
Jquery
jel.text("Hi! NHNgodo!");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Vanilla JS
Jquery

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in this JavaScript microbenchmark.

**What's being tested:**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two approaches:

1. **Vanilla JS**: This approach uses native JavaScript functions and methods to manipulate the DOM (Document Object Model). It tests how fast it can update the text content of an element.
2. **JQuery DOM**: This approach uses the jQuery library to manipulate the DOM. Specifically, it tests how fast it can update the text content of an element using jQuery's `text()` method.

**Options compared:**

The benchmark is comparing two options:

1. Using native JavaScript functions and methods (Vanilla JS)
2. Using jQuery's `text()` method (JQuery DOM)

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

**Vanilla JS:**

Pros:

* Faster execution speed, as it doesn't require loading an external library
* More efficient use of resources, as it uses native JavaScript functions

Cons:

* Requires more manual effort to update the DOM
* May not be as easy to use for complex DOM manipulations

**JQuery DOM:**

Pros:

* Easier to use, especially for complex DOM manipulations
* Provides a higher-level abstraction, making it easier to focus on logic rather than low-level DOM manipulation

Cons:

* Slower execution speed due to the overhead of loading and parsing the jQuery library
* Requires more resources, as the library needs to be loaded and parsed

**Other considerations:**

The benchmark also takes into account the **DevicePlatform**, **OperatingSystem**, and **Browser** used in each test run. This allows for a more accurate comparison of performance across different environments.

**Library usage:**

In this benchmark, jQuery is being used as a library to provide an abstraction layer for DOM manipulation. Specifically, the `text()` method is being used to update the text content of an element.

**Special JS feature/syntax:**

None are mentioned in this particular benchmark.

Now, regarding alternatives:

If you're looking for alternative libraries or approaches, here are some options:

* For native JavaScript DOM manipulation:
	+ React
	+ Angular (if not using jQuery)
	+ Vue.js
* For a lightweight and efficient DOM manipulation library:
	+ Vanilla-JS-Promise polyfills (e.g., promises.js)

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:88.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/88.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 88 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Vanilla JS	867325.9 Ops/sec
Jquery	493828.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance(vars in prep) (version: 0)

Vanilla JS VS JQuery DOM perfomance

Comparing performance of: Vanilla JS vs Jquery

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Vanilla JS

Jquery

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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