<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.slim.min.js"></script>
<div id="target">Hello World</div>
var $target = $('#target');
var $div = $('<div/>');
for(let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
$div.addClass('test-div');
$target.append($div);
}
for(let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
const e = document.createElement('div');
e.className = 'test-div';
document.getElementById('target').appendChild(e);
}
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
jQuery | |
VanillaJS |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
jQuery | 60.6 Ops/sec |
VanillaJS | 349.5 Ops/sec |
Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.
What is tested on the provided JSON?
The provided JSON represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks that compare the performance of jQuery (a popular JavaScript library) and vanilla JavaScript (the native JavaScript syntax) in executing a specific code snippet. The code snippet appends 10,000 HTML elements to an existing element (#target
) using both libraries.
Options compared:
The two options compared are:
Pros and Cons of each approach:
Library: jQuery
jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that provides a simplified way of manipulating the DOM. Its primary purpose is to simplify common tasks such as selecting elements, manipulating attributes, and handling events. In the provided benchmark, jQuery is used to append HTML elements to an existing element (#target
) using its append
method.
Special JS feature or syntax:
There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in the provided code snippet.
Other alternatives:
For DOM manipulation, other popular alternatives include:
For vanilla JavaScript DOM manipulation, developers can use native APIs such as document.createElement
, document.getElementById
, and appendChild
.
Benchmark preparation code:
The provided HTML preparation code includes the jQuery library, which is loaded from an external source (//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.slim.min.js
). The JavaScript preparation code for both options is similar, with the only difference being the use of the jQuery append
method versus the native appendChild
method.
Latest benchmark result:
The latest benchmark results show that VanillaJS outperforms jQuery in this specific test case, with an average of 44.19889450073242 executions per second compared to jQuery's 6.685769081115723 executions per second. This suggests that, for this particular use case, vanilla JavaScript may be a better choice due to its faster execution times.