Benchmark: Select by tag name vs select by id

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.4.1.min.js"></script>
<div id="testThisId"></div>

Tests:

jQuery (get by id)
var el = $("#testElement")[0];
jQuery (get by tag name)
var el = $("div")[0];
Vanilla JS (get by id)
var el = document.getElementById('testThisId');
Vanilla JS (get by tag name)
var el = document.getElementsByTagName('div');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jQuery (get by id)
jQuery (get by tag name)
Vanilla JS (get by id)
Vanilla JS (get by tag name)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark is comparing two approaches to select an element from a DOM: `select by tag name` and `select by id`.

**Options Compared**

1. **jQuery (get by tag name)**: Uses the `$` function to select elements by their tag name.
2. **jQuery (get by id)**: Uses the `$` function to select elements by their ID.
3. **Vanilla JS (get by id)**: Uses `document.getElementById()` to select an element by its ID.
4. **Vanilla JS (get by tag name)**: Uses `document.getElementsByTagName()` to get a list of all elements with the specified tag name.

**Pros and Cons**

* **jQuery**: Pros:
	+ Easy to use, as it's a popular library with a simple syntax.
	+ Provides many other useful functions for DOM manipulation.
Cons:
	+ Adds extra overhead due to the size of the jQuery library.
	+ May not be suitable for small projects or applications where size matters.
* **Vanilla JS**: Pros:
	+ Lightweight and doesn't add any additional overhead.
	+ Can be more efficient, as it only requires a single function call.
Cons:
	+ Requires more code to achieve the same result as jQuery.

**Library and Purpose**
The `jQuery` library is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation and provides a consistent way to select elements. It's widely used in web development for its ease of use, flexibility, and extensive feature set.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**
There isn't any special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The tests are purely focused on comparing the performance of different approaches to select an element from the DOM.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need a lightweight alternative to jQuery for selecting elements by ID, you can consider using `document.getElementById()` directly, as used in the "Vanilla JS (get by id)" test case. If you need to select multiple elements by tag name, you may want to look into other libraries like `Sizzle` or `PureCSS`, which provide alternative ways to select elements.

Overall, this benchmark provides a good comparison of two popular approaches to selecting elements from the DOM: jQuery's method and vanilla JavaScript's method.

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/80.0.3987.122 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 80 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jQuery (get by id)	1538849.6 Ops/sec
jQuery (get by tag name)	519281.4 Ops/sec
Vanilla JS (get by id)	3367495.8 Ops/sec
Vanilla JS (get by tag name)	2114630.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Select by tag name vs select by id (version: 0)

tag / id

Comparing performance of: jQuery (get by id) vs jQuery (get by tag name) vs Vanilla JS (get by id) vs Vanilla JS (get by tag name)

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jQuery (get by id)

jQuery (get by tag name)

Vanilla JS (get by id)

Vanilla JS (get by tag name)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):