Benchmark: test11146 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.4.1.min.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/umbrellajs"></script>
<div class="testElement"></div>

Script Preparation code:

function $q(selector, context) {
    return (context || document).querySelectorAll(selector);
}

Tests:

jQuery
var el = $(".testElement")[0]; var className = el.className;
Vanilla JS
var el = document.getElementsByClassName('testElement'); var className = el.className;
Vanilla JS querySelector
var el = document.querySelector('.testElement'); var className = el.className;
VanillaJS custom selector
var el = $q(".testElement"); var className = el.className;
Vanilla JS querySelectorAll
var el = document.querySelectorAll('.testElement'); var className = el.className;
UmbrellaJS
var el = u(".testElement"); var className = el.className;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jQuery
Vanilla JS
Vanilla JS querySelector
VanillaJS custom selector
Vanilla JS querySelectorAll
UmbrellaJS

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark definition and test cases are designed to measure the performance differences between various JavaScript libraries and vanilla JavaScript methods for selecting elements in HTML documents.

**Test Cases Comparison**

There are six test cases:

1. **Vanilla JS**: Using the `document.getElementsByClassName` method.
2. **Vanilla JS querySelector**: Using the `document.querySelector` method.
3. **jQuery**: Using jQuery's `$()` function to select elements.
4. **VanillaJS custom selector**: Using a custom JavaScript function (`$q`) with a similar syntax to jQuery.
5. **UmbrellaJS**: Using UmbrellaJS, a custom JavaScript library for working with HTML elements.

Each test case retrieves the class name of an element with a specific class name (`testElement`).

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of each option:

* Vanilla JS `getElementsByClassName`
* Vanilla JS `querySelector`
* jQuery `$()`
* VanillaJS custom selector (`$q`)
* UmbrellaJS

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Vanilla JS**: Fast, lightweight, but may require more code to achieve similar results.
	* Pros: Easy to implement, no dependencies required.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient for complex selections or older browsers.
2. **Vanilla JS querySelector**: Faster than `getElementsByClassName`, more modern and widely supported.
	* Pros: More efficient, widely supported by newer browsers.
	* Cons: Requires Modern JavaScript features (ES6+).
3. **jQuery**: Well-established, feature-rich library with a large community.
	* Pros: Easy to use, extensive features, wide browser support.
	* Cons: Large footprint (additional dependencies), may overkill for simple cases.
4. **VanillaJS custom selector (`$q`)**: Custom implementation similar to jQuery's syntax.
	* Pros: More efficient than `getElementsByClassName`, lightweight.
	* Cons: Requires additional code and maintenance effort.
5. **UmbrellaJS**: Another custom JavaScript library with a unique approach.
	* Pros: Optimized for specific use cases, potentially more efficient than vanilla JS methods.
	* Cons: Less widely adopted, may require more learning curve.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these options:

* Consider the complexity of your project and the required features. If you only need basic element selection, Vanilla JS might be sufficient.
* For larger projects or those targeting modern browsers, Vanilla JS querySelector is a good choice due to its efficiency and widespread support.
* If you want to avoid additional dependencies, consider using a lightweight custom implementation like VanillaJS custom selector (`$q`).
* UmbrellaJS is suitable for specific use cases where its optimized approach provides significant performance benefits.

Keep in mind that this benchmark only measures the execution speed of element selection. Other factors like code maintainability, readability, and browser support should also be considered when choosing a library or implementation.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/80.0.3987.116 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 80 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jQuery	530864.1 Ops/sec
Vanilla JS	1704327.9 Ops/sec
Vanilla JS querySelector	2155593.8 Ops/sec
VanillaJS custom selector	952001.4 Ops/sec
Vanilla JS querySelectorAll	1137671.6 Ops/sec
UmbrellaJS	216830.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test11146 (version: 0)

nothing

Comparing performance of: jQuery vs Vanilla JS vs Vanilla JS querySelector vs VanillaJS custom selector vs Vanilla JS querySelectorAll vs UmbrellaJS

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jQuery

Vanilla JS

Vanilla JS querySelector

VanillaJS custom selector

Vanilla JS querySelectorAll

UmbrellaJS

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):