Benchmark: Bob the Benchmark

HTML Preparation code:

<div><div id='foo' class='bar'><div></div></div></div>

Tests:

JQ by id
let v = $('#foo')
JQ by class
let v = $('.bar')
JS by id
let v = document.getElementById('foo')
JS by class
let v = document.getElementsByClassName('bar')[0]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JQ by id
JQ by class
JS by id
JS by class

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_12_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/60.0.3112.113 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 60 on Mac OS X 10.12.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JQ by id	996834.0 Ops/sec
JQ by class	564626.3 Ops/sec
JS by id	2439056.2 Ops/sec
JS by class	1918892.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks and explore what's being tested on the provided JSON.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark definition is a set of rules that govern how the benchmark should be executed. In this case, there are four test cases:

1. `JQ by id`: Uses jQuery to select an element by its ID (`let v = $('#foo')`).
2. `JQ by class`: Uses jQuery to select an element by its class (`let v = $('.bar')`).
3. `JS by id`: Uses the native JavaScript API to select an element by its ID (`let v = document.getElementById('foo')`).
4. `JS by class`: Uses the native JavaScript API to select an element by its class (`let v = document.getElementsByClassName('bar')[0]`).

**Options Compared**
The benchmark is comparing the performance of two approaches:

1. **jQuery**: A popular JavaScript library that provides a convenient way to manipulate the DOM.
2. **Native JavaScript API**: The built-in JavaScript API for interacting with the Document Object Model (DOM).

**Pros and Cons**

* **jQuery**:
	+ Pros: Easy to use, efficient, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: Can add unnecessary overhead due to its library size and dependencies.
* **Native JavaScript API**:
	+ Pros: Lightweight, fast, and optimized for performance.
	+ Cons: Can be more complex and error-prone, especially for beginners.

**Library: jQuery**
jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation. Its primary purpose is to provide a convenient way to interact with the web page's structure and elements. In this benchmark, jQuery is used to select an element by its ID or class. While jQuery can add value to your code, it also introduces an extra layer of complexity and overhead.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**
None mentioned in the provided JSON.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these approaches, consider the following factors:

* **Performance**: If speed is critical, native JavaScript API might be a better choice.
* **Complexity**: jQuery can make your code easier to read and write, but it may add unnecessary complexity if not used judiciously.
* **Weight**: Consider the size of your project and whether the extra weight of jQuery or another library is justified.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to jQuery or native JavaScript API, consider:

1. **D3.js**: A popular library for data visualization that also provides DOM manipulation capabilities.
2. **Lodash**: A utility library that offers a range of functions for manipulating arrays, objects, and more.
3. **Vanilla JavaScript**: Using only native JavaScript APIs can be a good option if you're building a lightweight project or prefer to avoid libraries altogether.

In conclusion, this benchmark is testing the performance of two approaches: jQuery and native JavaScript API. While both have their pros and cons, the choice ultimately depends on your specific needs, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

Bob the Benchmark (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JQ by id vs JQ by class vs JS by id vs JS by class

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JQ by id

JQ by class

JS by id

JS by class

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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