Benchmark: JQuery Speed Test

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='//code.jquery.com/jquery-1.12.4.min.js'></script>
<script>
  var $jq1124 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq33 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<div>
  <ul id="menu">
    <li class="menu-item">
    </li>
    <li class="menu-item">
    </li>
    <li class="menu-item">
    </li>
    <li class="menu-item">
    </li>
    
  </ul>
</div>

Script Preparation code:

function tests($) {
    $('#menu').css({
      'backgroud': 'red'
    });
    $('.menu-item').eq(2).hasClass('foo');
}

Tests:

$jq1124
tests($jq1124);
$jq33
tests($jq33);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
$jq1124
$jq33

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

This benchmark compares the performance of two different versions of jQuery:

* **$jq1124:** Represents jQuery version 1.12.4
* **$jq33:** Represents jQuery version 3.3.1

**What's being tested?**

The tests measure how quickly each jQuery version can execute a small set of code that modifies and interacts with HTML elements:

1. **Setting the background color:**  `$('#menu').css({'backgroud': 'red'});` - This line sets the background color of an element with the ID "menu" to red. 
2. **Checking for a class:** `.hasClass('foo');` - This line checks if a specific list item (the third one) within the "menu" has a class named "foo".

**Pros and Cons:**

* **jQuery's Advantages:** jQuery simplifies DOM manipulation, making code more concise and readable. It provides many useful utilities and methods for common tasks, potentially saving development time. 
* **Potential Performance Trade-offs:** While jQuery offers convenience, its abstraction layer can sometimes lead to performance overhead compared to directly using native JavaScript DOM APIs in highly optimized scenarios.

**Alternatives:**

* **Native JavaScript DOM API:** For very performance-critical code, using the core browser's JavaScript Document Object Model (DOM) API directly might be faster.
* **Other Libraries:** There are alternative libraries like Zepto.js or MooTools that offer similar functionality to jQuery but may have different performance characteristics.

**Key Considerations:**

*  Benchmark Results: The provided results show that jQuery 3.3.1 ($jq33) is slightly faster than jQuery 1.12.4 ($jq1124) in this specific test. However, performance can vary depending on the complexity of the tasks and other factors.
* **Real-world Usage:** Benchmark results are a good starting point, but consider your project's specific requirements, code complexity, and overall development needs when choosing a library.

Let me know if you have any more questions!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 11 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Android 14; Mobile; rv:132.0) Gecko/132.0 Firefox/132.0

Browser/OS: Firefox Mobile 132 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
$jq1124	382653.6 Ops/sec
$jq33	460741.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JQuery Speed Test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: $jq1124 vs $jq33

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

$jq1124

$jq33

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated one month ago):