Benchmark: Jquery v3.7.1 vs v4.0.0

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="//code.jquery.com/jquery-3.7.1.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq371 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="//code.jquery.com/jquery-4.0.0-beta.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq400 = $.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:

v3.7.1
tests($jq371);
v4.0.0
tests($jq400);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
v3.7.1
v4.0.0

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 24 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested, compared, and discussed.

**Benchmark Purpose:**

The main goal of this benchmark is to compare the performance of jQuery version 3.7.1 and version 4.0.0 (beta release) in a specific scenario.

**Script Preparation Code:**

The script preparation code defines a function `tests` that takes a jQuery object `$` as an argument. Inside the function, it:

* Sets the background color of an HTML element with the id `menu` to red.
* Checks if an element with the class `foo` exists within the first three elements of the list item inside the `ul` element.

This script is used to exercise the jQuery library and test its performance under different versions.

**Html Preparation Code:**

The html preparation code includes two JavaScript files:

1. `//code.jquery.com/jquery-3.7.1.min.js`: This file loads the jQuery 3.7.1 library.
2. `//code.jquery.com/jquery-4.0.0-beta.min.js`: This file loads the jQuery 4.0.0 beta release.

Additionally, it includes a simple HTML structure with an unordered list and three list items.

**Individual Test Cases:**

The benchmark consists of two individual test cases:

1. **v3.7.1**: Tests the `tests($jq371)` function, which uses jQuery version 3.7.1.
2. **v4.0.0**: Tests the `tests($jq400)` function, which uses jQuery version 4.0.0 beta release.

**Library:**

In this benchmark, jQuery is used as a library to simplify DOM manipulation and event handling tasks. The `$` object is an alias for the jQuery object, allowing the developer to use it in their code without having to prefix every jQuery method with `$`.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark. However, it does use some standard JavaScript concepts, such as functions, variables, and conditionals.

**Options Compared:**

The main option being compared is the performance of jQuery version 3.7.1 versus version 4.0.0 beta release under a specific scenario (the script preparation code).

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches:**

Using different versions of jQuery can have pros and cons:

* **jQuery 3.7.1 Pros:** It is likely to be more compatible with older browsers and environments, as it has been more extensively tested.
* **jQuery 4.0.0 Beta Release Pros:** It may offer improved performance and new features compared to the previous version.

However, there are also potential drawbacks:

* **Incompatibility Issues**: Using beta software (like a release candidate) can lead to compatibility issues with older browsers or environments.
* **Performance Overhead**: The new features in version 4.0.0 might introduce additional overhead due to their complexity or implementation details.

**Other Alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternatives to jQuery, some popular options include:

1. Lodash (a utility library)
2. React (a JavaScript library for building user interfaces)
3. Vanilla JavaScript (using only built-in JavaScript features and DOM manipulation)

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own strengths and weaknesses, and the choice ultimately depends on your specific use case and requirements.

In summary, this benchmark compares the performance of two different jQuery versions under a specific scenario. It highlights the importance of considering version compatibility and potential performance differences when choosing a library for your project.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
v3.7.1	825979.8 Ops/sec
v4.0.0	831912.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Jquery v3.7.1 vs v4.0.0 (version: 0)

Pre-benchmark for BETA RELEASE v4.0.0

Comparing performance of: v3.7.1 vs v4.0.0

Created: 9 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

v3.7.1

v4.0.0

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 24 days ago):