Benchmark: Jquery vs vanila

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="testID">Hello World</div>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.js'></script>

Tests:

jquery
let el = $('#testID');
vanilla
let el = document.getElementById('testID');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jquery
vanilla

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'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches: jQuery (a JavaScript library) and vanilla JavaScript (the built-in JavaScript syntax). The test is designed to measure which approach is faster in terms of execution speed.

**Options Compared**

1. **jQuery**: A popular JavaScript library that provides a set of pre-built functions for DOM manipulation, event handling, and other tasks.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript**: The native JavaScript syntax, without any additional libraries or frameworks.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**jQuery:**

Pros:

* Faster execution speed due to optimized code and caching mechanisms
* Easier to use, especially for simple tasks like DOM manipulation
* Provides a wide range of built-in functions and methods

Cons:

* Adds an extra layer of complexity, as the developer needs to learn the library's API
* Can be slower if not properly optimized or cached
* May require additional setup and configuration

**Vanilla JavaScript:**

Pros:

* Faster execution speed due to no overhead from a library
* More control over the code, allowing for customization and optimization
* No additional dependencies or configuration required

Cons:

* Requires more effort and knowledge of native JavaScript syntax
* Can be slower if not optimized properly
* May not provide the same level of functionality as jQuery

**Library Used:**

The test uses jQuery version 3.3.1, which is a popular and widely-used version at the time of writing.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax:**

None of the tests use any special JavaScript features or syntax that are not part of the standard language. Both approaches rely on native JavaScript functionality.

**Other Alternatives:**

If you're interested in alternative libraries or frameworks for DOM manipulation and event handling, some popular options include:

* React
* Angular
* Vue.js
* Lodash

Keep in mind that each library has its own strengths and weaknesses, and the choice of which one to use depends on your specific project requirements and personal preferences.

I hope this explanation helps! Let me know if you have any further questions.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/106.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 106 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jquery	2063125.1 Ops/sec
vanilla	5269201.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Jquery vs vanila (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: jquery vs vanilla

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jquery

vanilla

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):