jQuery vs Vanilla JS: Key Differences Quiz Quiz

Explore key differences between jQuery and Vanilla JS with this quiz designed to clarify syntax, performance, and usage scenarios. Perfect for those evaluating when and why to choose JavaScript frameworks or stick with native JavaScript methods.

1. Syntax Comparison: Element Selection

   Which statement correctly selects all elements with the class 'button' using Vanilla JS?

   1. getElementsByClass('button')
   2. $('.button')
   3. document.buttonClass()
   4. document.querySelectorAll('.button')

   Explanation: The statement 'document.querySelectorAll('.button')' is the correct way to select all elements with the class 'button' using Vanilla JS. '$('.button')' relies on a third-party library, while 'getElementsByClass('button')' is a typo as it should be 'getElementsByClassName'. 'document.buttonClass()' does not exist in standard JavaScript. Only the first option aligns with native syntax.

2. Event Handling Differences

   If you want to add a click event to an element with the ID 'submit', which Vanilla JS method should you use instead of jQuery's '.on('click', ...)'?

   1. element.binding('click', ...)
   2. addEventListener('click', ...)
   3. attachClick('submit', ...)
   4. onClickEvent('submit', ...)

   Explanation: 'addEventListener('click', ...)' is the standard way to add an event listener in Vanilla JS. 'attachClick' and 'onClickEvent' are not part of the native API, and 'element.binding('click', ...)' is an incorrect method naming. The first option is the only valid Vanilla JS approach for event handling.

3. Performance Considerations

   Why is Vanilla JS typically faster than using a library for simple DOM manipulations?

   1. It connects directly to the database
   2. It does not require any HTML
   3. It has no library overhead or abstraction layers
   4. It uses specialized compilers

   Explanation: Vanilla JS is usually faster because it runs without the extra code and abstractions introduced by libraries. Specialized compilers and direct database access are unrelated to basic DOM manipulation speed. HTML is still required regardless of script choice. Only the absence of library overhead accurately explains the performance difference.

4. Compatibility Scenarios

   Which scenario best justifies choosing a library over Vanilla JS for DOM manipulation?

   1. Wanting a smaller file size for scripts
   2. Needing a faster execution time for simple functions
   3. Needing to support a range of outdated browsers with inconsistent native APIs
   4. Working solely with modern browser environments

   Explanation: Libraries help bridge the gap for inconsistent API support in older environments, handling differences under the hood. For smaller file sizes and faster execution, Vanilla JS is usually preferred. If only targeting modern browsers, native features are sufficient, making libraries less necessary.

5. Chaining Methods

   Which statement is true about method chaining when comparing Vanilla JS to jQuery?

   1. Only Vanilla JS supports chaining out of the box
   2. Both provide full method chaining by default
   3. Chaining is built-in to jQuery but must be manually implemented in Vanilla JS
   4. Chaining is not available in either approach

   Explanation: Chaining multiple methods is a core feature of jQuery thanks to how it returns objects after each method call. In Vanilla JS, methods like addEventListener or classList do not return the element, so chaining must be implemented manually or with helper patterns. The second and third options falsely claim equal or exclusive support, and the last is incorrect since chaining is a key feature in at least one approach.