Benchmark: JQuery 1 vs 2 vs 3 vs 4

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.12.4/jquery.min.js'></script>
<script>
  var $jq1124 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/2.2.4/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq224 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.4.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq341 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.7.1.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq371 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-4.0.0-beta.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq400beta = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<div>
  <ul id="menu">
    <li class="menu-item">1</li>
    <li class="menu-item">2</li>
    <li class="menu-item">3</li>
    <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li>      <li class="menu-item">4</li> 
  </ul>
</div>

Script Preparation code:

function tests($) {
    $(".menu-item").eq(2).closest("ul").css({
      "background-color": "red"
    }).parent().css({
      "border": "1px solid blue"
    }).append($("<p></p>").text("Text.").css({
      "background-color": "green"
    })).end().end().remove();
  console.log('tests' + $);
}

Tests:

jq1.12.4
tests($jq1124);
jq2.2.4
tests($jq224);
jq3.4.1
tests($jq341);
jq3.7.1
tests($jq371);
jq4.0.0-beta
tests($jq400beta);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jq1.12.4
jq2.2.4
jq3.4.1
jq3.7.1
jq4.0.0-beta

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 23 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/109.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 109 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jq1.12.4	10529.2 Ops/sec
jq2.2.4	13407.9 Ops/sec
jq3.4.1	13647.9 Ops/sec
jq3.7.1	13358.2 Ops/sec
jq4.0.0-beta	13123.4 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript benchmarks!

**What is tested on the provided JSON?**

The provided JSON represents a benchmarking test case for comparing the performance of different versions of jQuery (a popular JavaScript library). Specifically, it tests the execution speed of the `tests` function with each version of jQuery, from 1.12.4 to 4.0.0-beta.

**Options being compared:**

The options being compared are the different versions of jQuery:

* jq1.12.4
* jq2.2.4
* jq3.4.1
* jq3.7.1
* jq4.0.0-beta

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

Each version of jQuery has its own strengths and weaknesses, which affect the performance of the benchmark:

* **jq1.12.4**: Older version with known limitations in certain areas (e.g., async support). It's likely to be slower than newer versions.
	+ Pros: May be more compatible with older browsers or environments.
	+ Cons: Limited features and slower performance.
* **jq2.2.4**: Mid-range version with a good balance of features and performance.
	+ Pros: Balances compatibility and performance.
	+ Cons: May not have the latest features or optimizations.
* **jq3.4.1** and **jq3.7.1**: Newer versions with improved performance and feature set.
	+ Pros: Latest features, better performance, and optimized for modern browsers.
	+ Cons: May require more significant changes to existing codebases.
* **jq4.0.0-beta**: Latest beta version with experimental features and ongoing development.
	+ Pros: Potential for significant performance improvements and new features.
	+ Cons: Unstable and may introduce bugs or regressions.

**Library and its purpose**

The jQuery library is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation, event handling, and animation. It's widely used in web development due to its ease of use and flexibility.

In this benchmark, the `$.noConflict()` function is used to ensure compatibility with other libraries or codebases that rely on the `$` symbol for variable assignment (e.g., some browsers or plugins).

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no specific JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is solely on comparing the performance of different versions of jQuery.

**Benchmark results**

The provided JSON includes the raw UA string, browser information, device platform, operating system, executions per second, and test name for each version of jQuery. This data can be used to analyze the performance differences between the versions and provide insights into which version is best suited for a specific use case or environment.

I hope this explanation helps!

Related benchmarks:

JQuery 1 vs 2 vs 3 vs 4 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: jq1.12.4 vs jq2.2.4 vs jq3.4.1 vs jq3.7.1 vs jq4.0.0-beta

Comparing performance of: jq1.12.4 vs jq2.2.4 vs jq3.4.1 vs jq3.7.1 vs jq4.0.0-beta

Created: 10 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jq1.12.4

jq2.2.4

jq3.4.1

jq3.7.1

jq4.0.0-beta

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):