Benchmark: jQuery by id vs Document.getElementById 3.4.1

HTML Preparation code:

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

Tests:

jQuery
var el = $(".test");
Vanilla JS
var el = document.querySelectorAll('.test');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
jQuery
Vanilla JS

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/76.0.3809.132 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 76 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
jQuery	376643.3 Ops/sec
Vanilla JS	917216.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test measures the performance of two ways to retrieve an HTML element by its ID using JavaScript: jQuery and vanilla JavaScript (also known as Document.getElementById).

**Options Being Compared**

* **jQuery**: Uses the jQuery library to select elements by their ID. This approach is often considered more convenient and easier to use, but may also introduce a performance overhead due to the library's complexity.
* **Vanilla JavaScript** (`Document.getElementById`): Uses the built-in `document.getElementById` method to retrieve an element by its ID. This approach is lightweight and fast but requires manual DOM manipulation.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **jQuery**:
	+ Pros: Convenient, easy to use, and often preferred by developers due to its vast ecosystem and features.
	+ Cons: May introduce a performance overhead, and its complexity can lead to security vulnerabilities if not used carefully.
* **Vanilla JavaScript** (`Document.getElementById`):
	+ Pros: Lightweight, fast, and straightforward. No external libraries or dependencies required.
	+ Cons: Requires manual DOM manipulation, which can be error-prone and less convenient.

**Library and Purpose**

The jQuery library is a popular JavaScript library that simplifies DOM manipulation and event handling. In this benchmark, it's used to select elements by their ID using the `$` symbol (`$(id)`). The purpose of this library is to provide a more convenient and efficient way to interact with the DOM.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There isn't any special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It only involves standard JavaScript functions like `document.getElementById`.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative libraries or methods to select elements by ID, consider:

* **Sizzle**: A lightweight, fast, and more efficient alternative to jQuery's selector engine.
* **vanilla-regex**: A library that provides a regex-based way to select elements in the DOM.
* **CSS selectors**: Using CSS selectors can also be used to retrieve elements by their ID, but this approach requires additional CSS rules and is often less convenient.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not provide the same level of convenience as jQuery or vanilla JavaScript's `document.getElementById`.

Overall, this benchmark provides a simple yet informative way to compare the performance of two commonly used approaches to retrieving elements by ID in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

jQuery by id vs Document.getElementById 3.4.1 (version: 0)

Comparing speed of getting element by id with jQuery vs Vanilla JS

Comparing performance of: jQuery vs Vanilla JS

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

jQuery

Vanilla JS

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):