<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>
<div id="test"></div>
$("div").append($("ul")).append($("li"))
let div = document.getElementById('test');
let ul = document.createElement('ul');
ul.className = 'test-list';
let li = document.createElement('li');
li.className = 'test-item';
ul.append(li);
div.append(ul);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
jquery | |
vanilla js |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
jquery | 371378.6 Ops/sec |
vanilla js | 7324.3 Ops/sec |
Let's dive into the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and analyzed.
What is being tested?
The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches: jQuery (a JavaScript library) and Vanilla JavaScript (the native JavaScript syntax).
Options compared:
Two options are compared:
Pros and Cons of each approach:
jQuery:
Pros:
Cons:
Vanilla JavaScript:
Pros:
Cons:
Library used:
In this benchmark, jQuery is loaded from a CDN (Content Delivery Network) to ensure consistency across different environments.
Special JavaScript features or syntax:
None are mentioned specifically in the provided code or benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some browsers may have specific extensions or flags enabled that could affect performance, such as Just-In-Time (JIT) compilation or Web Workers.
Other alternatives:
Other JavaScript libraries and frameworks could be used instead of jQuery, depending on the specific requirements of the project. Some popular alternatives include:
Additionally, other approaches to DOM manipulation and event handling exist, such as:
It's essential to consider factors like performance, maintenance ease, and feature set when choosing a JavaScript library or framework for your project.