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 src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/2.2.4/jquery.min.js">
</script>
<script>
  var $jq224 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq331 = $.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);
$jq224
tests($jq224);
$jq331
tests($jq331);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
$jq1124
$jq224
$jq331

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested and compared in this benchmark.

**Library Used:**
The test case uses jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation, event handling, and animation. The library is used to perform various operations on the HTML elements within the document.

**Test Case Description:**
The benchmark tests the performance of three different versions of jQuery:

1. **$jq1124**: jQuery 1.12.4
2. **$jq224**: jQuery 2.2.4
3. **$jq331**: jQuery 3.3.1

Each test case uses the `tests()` function, which is defined in the Script Preparation Code, to perform two operations on the HTML elements:

1. Set the background color of an element with the ID "menu" to red.
2. Check if an element with class "menu-item" and index 2 has a CSS class named "foo".

**Test Options Compared:**
The benchmark compares the execution speed (Executions Per Second) of these three jQuery versions on the same set of operations.

**Pros/Cons of Different Approaches:**

* **Older versions ($jq1124, $jq224)**:
	+ Pros: More compatibility with older browsers and web pages.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to older codebase and fewer optimizations.
* **Newer version ($jq331)**:
	+ Pros: Better performance, more features, and improved optimization.
	+ Cons: Less compatible with older browsers and web pages.

**Considerations:**
When choosing a jQuery version for your project, consider the following:

* If you need to support older browsers (e.g., Internet Explorer 8), use an older version ($jq1124 or $jq224).
* For modern projects that require better performance and newer features, use the latest version ($jq331).

**Other Alternatives:**
If you're not using jQuery or want alternatives for DOM manipulation, consider:

1. **Native JavaScript**: Use the W3C DOM API for manipulating HTML elements.
2. **MooTools**: A lightweight alternative to jQuery with a similar API.
3. **Zepto.js**: A lightweight, jQuery-compatible library for modern browsers.

Now that we've explored the benchmark, you can make informed decisions about which jQuery version or alternative to use in your projects!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 12 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	399365.9 Ops/sec
$jq224	447398.7 Ops/sec
$jq331	420138.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JQuery Speed Test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: $jq1124 vs $jq224 vs $jq331

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

$jq1124

$jq224

$jq331

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one month ago):