These numbers have already been invalidated here:

http://0nz.spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?id=o04790098234894520511.5178455417629729589.12842749026303919978.6392792159332293656

One of people that commented on Claudio's posting ran the tests himself 
and got very different results.

Dean Edwards also jumped in to give his viewpoints on this and he said,

"Let me guess. You performed these tests on a page with very few 
elements. Prototype is very good at executing lots of little queries. It 
is very bad at executing lots of large queries. Please post your source 
code."

and

"Try buidling a page with ten thousand nodes then run the tests again…"

So it appears that the benchmarks are very representative of anything 
except perhaps spreading a little FUD.

Rey...

Nilesh Patel wrote:
> hey all, anyone else seen this too?
> 
> 
> http://ajaxian.com/archives/benchmark-prototype-and-jquery
> 
> Claudio Cicali thinks benchmarks are boring and useless, so he decided 
> to conduct a series of micro-benchmarks of CSS selector tests with both 
> Prototype and jQuery. He decided to do this after he saw others observe:
> 
>      * Prototype (1.5+) has CSS selector syntax now
>      * "jQuery is horribly SLOW"
> 
> 
> 
> http://ajaxian.com/archives/benchmark-prototype-and-jquery

_______________________________________________
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/

Reply via email to