Benchmark: $.trim() vs .trim()

HTML Preparation code:

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

Tests:

$.trim()
$.trim(document.getElementById('text').textContent)
trim()
document.getElementById('text').textContent.trim()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
$.trim()
trim()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches to trimming strings: using jQuery's `$.trim()` method versus the built-in string `trim()` method in JavaScript.

**Options being compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **jQuery's `$.trim()`**: This method is part of the jQuery library, which provides a set of DOM manipulation and event handling methods. The `$.trim()` function removes whitespace from the start and end of a string.
2. **Built-in JavaScript string `trim()` method**: This is a native JavaScript method that also removes whitespace from the start and end of a string.

**Pros and Cons**

* **jQuery's `$.trim()`**:
	+ Pros: jQuery is widely used, and its DOM manipulation methods are often included in projects by default. Using jQuery's `$.trim()` might simplify code and reduce dependencies.
	+ Cons: Using an external library can add overhead due to loading and parsing the library's code. Additionally, using a library's method might lead to security vulnerabilities if not used properly.
* **Built-in JavaScript string `trim()` method**:
	+ Pros: This is a native method that doesn't require any external dependencies or libraries, making it potentially faster and more lightweight.
	+ Cons: If not implemented correctly, the built-in `trim()` method might have issues with handling certain edge cases.

**Other considerations**

* **Library usage**: The benchmark uses jQuery's library. In general, using libraries can add overhead due to loading and parsing the code, but it also simplifies development by providing a set of pre-built functions.
* **Native JavaScript methods**: Using native JavaScript methods like `trim()` can be more efficient since they don't require any external dependencies or libraries.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. However, using jQuery's `$.trim()` method introduces some nuances:

* The `.` notation is used to access the library's functions and methods.
* The `$` symbol represents the jQuery object, which provides a set of DOM manipulation and event handling methods.

**Other alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to trimming strings, here are a few options:

1. **Using a regular expression**: You can use a regular expression like `/^\s+|\s+$/.replace(/^(?:\r\n|[\n\r])?/gm, '')` to remove whitespace from the start and end of a string.
2. **Using a custom implementation**: Depending on your specific requirements, you might need to implement a custom trimming function that handles specific edge cases or formatting.

Keep in mind that this benchmark is focused on comparing jQuery's `$.trim()` method versus the built-in JavaScript string `trim()` method, so other alternatives are not being tested here.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/71.0.3578.98 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 71 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
$.trim()	1257732.1 Ops/sec
trim()	2452144.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

$.trim() vs .trim() (version: 0)

jQuery trim vs browser trim

Comparing performance of: $.trim() vs trim()

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

$.trim()

trim()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):