Benchmark: JQuery version speed test jQuery 3.4.0 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.11.3/jquery.min.js'></script>
<script>
  var $jq1113 = $.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/3.3.1/jquery.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq331 = $.noConflict(true);
</script>
<script src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.4.0.min.js"></script>
<script>
  var $jq340 = $.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>  
  </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:

Test jQuery 1.11.3
tests($jq1113);
Test jQuery 2.2.4
tests($jq224);
Test jQuery 3.3.1
tests($jq331);
Test jQuery 3.4.0
tests($jq340);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Test jQuery 1.11.3
Test jQuery 2.2.4
Test jQuery 3.3.1
Test jQuery 3.4.0

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 break down the provided benchmarking data and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net provides JavaScript microbenchmarks, allowing users to compare different versions of jQuery (a popular JavaScript library for DOM manipulation). The benchmark consists of a script preparation code that creates a simple HTML structure using jQuery and performs some operations on it. The execution time of this script is measured across various browsers and versions.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark includes four test cases, each testing a specific version of jQuery:

1. **Test jQuery 1.11.3**: Tests the `$.noConflict(true)`-wrapped jQuery 1.11.3.
2. **Test jQuery 2.2.4**: Tests the `$.noConflict(true)`-wrapped jQuery 2.2.4.
3. **Test jQuery 3.3.1**: Tests the `$.noConflict(true)`-wrapped jQuery 3.3.1.
4. **Test jQuery 3.4.0**: Tests the `$.noConflict(true)`-wrapped jQuery 3.4.0.

**Comparison Options**

The benchmark compares the execution times of different versions of jQuery, using the same HTML structure and script preparation code. This allows users to compare the performance of each version across various browsers.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Pros:**
	+ Allows for a fair comparison of different jQuery versions.
	+ Uses standardized test cases (HTML structure and script preparation code).
	+ Includes multiple browser versions and platforms.
* **Cons:**
	+ May not accurately reflect real-world scenarios, as the benchmarked HTML structure and operations are simplified.
	+ Does not account for other factors that might impact performance, such as system resources or specific browser extensions.

**Library and Purpose**

The `$.noConflict(true)` library is used to resolve naming conflicts between jQuery and other libraries. It returns a new object with modified versions of the original jQuery functions, allowing them to coexist without conflicts.

**Special JavaScript Features**

There are no special JavaScript features mentioned in this benchmarking data.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in comparing different JavaScript libraries or frameworks for DOM manipulation, consider using alternative benchmarks, such as:

1. **Benchpress.js**: A web-based benchmarking tool that allows users to compare the performance of various JavaScript libraries and frameworks.
2. **jsbench.me**: A JavaScript benchmarking tool that provides a simple way to compare the execution times of different code snippets.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own strengths and weaknesses, so it's essential to choose the one that best suits your specific needs and requirements.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/120.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Test jQuery 1.11.3	56642.5 Ops/sec
Test jQuery 2.2.4	74638.9 Ops/sec
Test jQuery 3.3.1	74613.0 Ops/sec
Test jQuery 3.4.0	68443.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JQuery version speed test jQuery 3.4.0 2 (version: 0)

JQuery version speed test

Comparing performance of: Test jQuery 1.11.3 vs Test jQuery 2.2.4 vs Test jQuery 3.3.1 vs Test jQuery 3.4.0

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Test jQuery 1.11.3

Test jQuery 2.2.4

Test jQuery 3.3.1

Test jQuery 3.4.0

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):