Benchmark: Vergleich - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.1.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<div id="nhngodo">Hi! NHNgodo!</div>

Tests:

PlainJS
document.getElementById("nhngodo");
jQuery
$("#nhngodo");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
PlainJS
jQuery

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/93.0.4577.82 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 93 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
PlainJS	4243582.0 Ops/sec
jQuery	1362556.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in this benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks: one using plain JavaScript (also known as vanilla JavaScript) and the other using jQuery, a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation.

**Options compared:**

The main option being compared is:

1. **Plain JavaScript**: This approach uses native JavaScript functions to select an HTML element.
2. **jQuery**: This approach uses the jQuery library to select an HTML element.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

**Plain JavaScript:**

Pros:

* Native JavaScript, so no external dependencies are required.
* Can be more efficient since it doesn't require loading a separate library.
* Typically faster execution times since there's less overhead due to the extra library.

Cons:

* Requires manual DOM manipulation using native functions like `document.getElementById()` or `document.querySelector()`.
* May not be as convenient or concise for complex DOM operations.

**jQuery:**

Pros:

* Provides a more convenient and concise way to manipulate the DOM, with methods like `$()` (the jQuery selector) that return jQuery objects.
* Includes various utility functions and event handling capabilities.
* Can simplify code, making it easier to work with dynamic content.

Cons:

* Requires loading an additional library (jQuery), which may introduce overhead or affect performance.
* May be slower than plain JavaScript since the browser needs to load and parse the jQuery library.

**Library and its purpose:**

In this benchmark, jQuery is used for its selector functionality (`$()`). jQuery is a popular JavaScript library that provides a set of methods and functions for DOM manipulation, event handling, and other utility purposes. Its main purpose is to simplify and streamline web development tasks by providing an easier-to-use interface than native JavaScript.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

In this benchmark, no special JavaScript features or syntax are being tested. The focus is on comparing plain JavaScript vs jQuery for DOM selection.

**Other alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to DOM selection, some other options include:

* Vanilla CSS selectors (e.g., `div#nhngodo { /* styles */ }`)
* Modern JavaScript libraries like React or Angular, which provide their own DOM manipulation APIs.
* Other libraries like Sizzle (a jQuery-like selector engine) or CSS Selectors.

Keep in mind that each approach has its pros and cons, and the choice ultimately depends on your specific use case, project requirements, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

Vergleich (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: PlainJS vs jQuery

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

PlainJS

jQuery

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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