Benchmark: JQuery Mobile 1.4.5 Load Speed On Jquery 3.3.1 3-cases

HTML Preparation code:

<head>
    <title>Hello World!</title> 
  	<script src='//code.jquery.com/jquery-3.3.1.min.js'></script>
	<script src='//code.jquery.com/mobile/1.4.5/jquery.mobile-1.4.5.min.js'></script>
 	<link rel="stylesheet" href="//code.jquery.com/mobile/1.4.5/jquery.mobile-1.4.5.min.css" />
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1"/> 
</head>
<body> 
<div data-role="page">
    <div data-role="header">
        <h1>Curonsys</h1>
    </div>
    <div data-role="content"> 
        <p>Hello world</p>
    </div>
  	<ul id="mylist" data-role="listview" data-inset="true" data-theme="d" data-divider-theme="e" data-count-theme="b">
		<li data-role="list-divider">Divider</li>
		<li><a href="#">Inbox <span class="ui-li-count">12</span></a></li>
		<li><a href="#">Outbox <span class="ui-li-count">0</span></a></li>
		<li><a href="#">Sent <span class="ui-li-count">328</span></a></li>
      	<input type="button" value="http://curonsys.com" id="curo" class="myButton" data-inline="true"/>
    	<input type="button" value="http://naver.com" id="nav" class="myButton" data-inline="true"/>
	</ul>
</div>
</body>

AخA
 
<head>
    <title>Hello World!</title> 
    <script src='//code.jquery.com/jquery-3.3.1.min.js'></script>
    <script src='//code.jquery.com/mobile/1.4.5/jquery.mobile-1.4.5.min.js'></script>
    <link rel="stylesheet" href="//code.jquery.com/mobile/1.4.5/jquery.mobile-1.4.5.min.css" />
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1"/> 
</head>
<body> 
<div data-role="page">
    <div data-role="header">
        <h1>Curonsys</h1>
    </div>
    <div data-role="content"> 
        <p>Hello world</p>
    </div>
    <ul id="mylist" data-role="listview" data-inset="true" data-theme="d" data-divider-theme="e" data-count-theme="b">
        <li data-role="list-divider">Divider</li>
        <li><a href="#">Inbox <span class="ui-li-count">12</span></a></li>
        <li><a href="#">Outbox <span class="ui-li-count">0</span></a></li>
        <li><a href="#">Sent <span class="ui-li-count">328</span></a></li>
        <input type="button" value="http://curonsys.com" id="curo" class="myButton" data-inline="true"/>
        <input type="button" value="http://naver.com" id="nav" class="myButton" data-inline="true"/>
    </ul>
</div>
</body>

Script Preparation code:

var dirName;
var isRel;
var parseLocation;

 
var dirName;var isRel;var parseLocation;

Tests:

path
$(document).ready(function() { dirName = $.mobile.path.get($('curo').attr('value')); });
$(document).ready(function() {
dirName = $.mobile.path.get($('curo').attr('value'));
});
url
$(document).ready(function() { isRel = $.mobile.path.isRelativeUrl($('nav').attr('value')); });
$(document).ready(function() {
isRel = $.mobile.path.isRelativeUrl($('nav').attr('value'));
});
parseLocation
$(document).ready(function() { parseLocation = $.mobile.path.parseLocation(); });
$(document).ready(function() {
parseLocation = $.mobile.path.parseLocation();
});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

Test case name	Result
path
url
parseLocation

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:77.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/77.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 77 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
path	6027.1 Ops/sec
url	10859.7 Ops/sec
parseLocation	3702.1 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

I'll break down what's being tested in the provided JSON and explain the options, pros, cons, and other considerations.

Benchmark Definition

The benchmark is testing the performance of jQuery Mobile 1.4.5 when loaded on top of jQuery 3.3.1. The test consists of three cases:

Loading a URL: Testing the $.mobile.path.isRelativeUrl() function.
Parsing a location: Testing the $.mobile.path.parseLocation() function.
Getting a directory path: Testing the $.mobile.path.get() function.

Options Compared

The benchmark is comparing the performance of three different approaches:

Relative URL: Passing a relative URL to the isRel function.
Absolute URL: Passing an absolute URL to the isRel function.
URL Parse: Using the parseLocation variable, which is obtained by parsing a location using $.mobile.path.parseLocation().

Pros and Cons

Relative URL:
- Pros: Simple and straightforward.
- Cons: May not work well for all cases (e.g., relative URLs with query parameters).
Absolute URL:
- Pros: Works well for most cases, including those with query parameters.
- Cons: Requires a valid absolute URL.
URL Parse:
- Pros: Provides more detailed information about the parsed location.
- Cons: May be slower due to the extra processing required.

Library and Purpose

The $.mobile library is used in this benchmark, which is part of jQuery Mobile. The purpose of this library is to provide a set of APIs for building mobile applications using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.

Special JS Feature or Syntax

This benchmark does not appear to use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would affect its performance or behavior. However, it's worth noting that the $.mobile library is specific to jQuery Mobile and may not work with other frameworks or libraries.

Other Considerations

The benchmark is designed to test the performance of the .mobile.path functions in different scenarios. The use of relative URLs, absolute URLs, and URL parsing can affect the performance of these functions, and this benchmark aims to identify the most efficient approach for each scenario.

Alternatives

There are other alternatives to the $.mobile.path functions, such as using native JavaScript APIs or third-party libraries like url-parser. However, the $.mobile.path functions are part of jQuery Mobile and provide a convenient and portable way to work with URLs and locations in mobile applications.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down what's being tested in the provided JSON and explain the options, pros, cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing the performance of jQuery Mobile 1.4.5 when loaded on top of jQuery 3.3.1. The test consists of three cases:

1. Loading a URL: Testing the `$.mobile.path.isRelativeUrl()` function.
2. Parsing a location: Testing the `$.mobile.path.parseLocation()` function.
3. Getting a directory path: Testing the `$.mobile.path.get()` function.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of three different approaches:

1. **Relative URL**: Passing a relative URL to the `isRel` function.
2. **Absolute URL**: Passing an absolute URL to the `isRel` function.
3. **URL Parse**: Using the `parseLocation` variable, which is obtained by parsing a location using `$.mobile.path.parseLocation()`.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Relative URL**:
	+ Pros: Simple and straightforward.
	+ Cons: May not work well for all cases (e.g., relative URLs with query parameters).
* **Absolute URL**:
	+ Pros: Works well for most cases, including those with query parameters.
	+ Cons: Requires a valid absolute URL.
* **URL Parse**: 
	+ Pros: Provides more detailed information about the parsed location.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the extra processing required.

**Library and Purpose**

The `$.mobile` library is used in this benchmark, which is part of jQuery Mobile. The purpose of this library is to provide a set of APIs for building mobile applications using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

This benchmark does not appear to use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would affect its performance or behavior. However, it's worth noting that the `$.mobile` library is specific to jQuery Mobile and may not work with other frameworks or libraries.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark is designed to test the performance of the `.mobile.path` functions in different scenarios. The use of relative URLs, absolute URLs, and URL parsing can affect the performance of these functions, and this benchmark aims to identify the most efficient approach for each scenario.

**Alternatives**

There are other alternatives to the `$.mobile.path` functions, such as using native JavaScript APIs or third-party libraries like `url-parser`. However, the `$.mobile.path` functions are part of jQuery Mobile and provide a convenient and portable way to work with URLs and locations in mobile applications.

Related benchmarks:

JQuery Mobile 1.4.5 Load Speed On Jquery 3.3.1 3-cases (version: 0)

jinungcho20190628

Comparing performance of: path vs url vs parseLocation

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

path

url

parseLocation

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):