if you want to try the test you can visit this page: http://bill.dojotoolkit.org/taskspeed/
or create a local TaskSpeed implementation On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 3:19 PM, David Zhou <[email protected]> wrote: > > How many times did you run your tests? Are these averages? > > Also, did you try the tests on a non-Windows XP or Vista machine to > get more accurate results? (At least for Firefox and Opera). > > I don't doubt that pure DOM manipulation is going to be faster, but > it's certainly surprising to see how much faster it is than any > library. > > -- dz > > > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Gilles <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I understand better your point, but I think to an extend people use > > libraries for left side of the equation like you said, which is > > probably why library developers seems to concentrate more on that. > > Also I think JQuery is on the right track as the latest releases were > > about improving performance rather than adding some other cool stuff > > to it. Frankly I think it got enough cool stuff already, but I am > > looking forward to the require() addition tho. > > > > The thing is tho, if a library doesn't support the cool stuff it will > > be seen as not up to date with the competition and it will lose some > > of its popularity. And most people who use those libraries are not > > always that worried about the performance side of things, often it is > > more developer that tend to worry about that and frankly by my work > > experience I can say even in professional environment there isn't > > enough of them that actually care. You still have tonnes of companies > > doing web application that will not behave well outside IE, no > > validation, no multibrowser support, no javascript off support > > etc.... > > > > Personally I like to have my little benchmark and try to improve speed > > and all (mostly in php still, in javascript I still got a lot to > > learn, too often wrong :p) > > > > Hopefully things will get better in the future now that IE8 is out > > (also the number of current IE6 users still alarming), it's still not > > perfect of course, but the few things I tried on it so far behave more > > like they are suppose to. > > > > Wouldn't be nice when you can just code thing the way they should and > > they would work everywhere. Imagine the footprint of everything > > without all the lines for IE and other weird borsers lol > > > > > > > > On Apr 2, 12:32 pm, Andrea Giammarchi <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> performances improvements and 44 seconds rather than 3 do not make > sense, > >> imho. > >> > >> What I am saying is that we, as libraries developers, just put layers to > >> make IE behaves like every other cool browser. > >> This layer at the same time is slowing down IE speed, which has already > the > >> worse JS engine ever, compared to others. > >> > >> So, the equation is simple: cool stuff : IE = performances : bad > >> > >> I am sure a lot of code is focused just on the left part of the equation > >> while should be nice, in my opinion, to consider more the right side > when it > >> is possible. > >> > >> Better? > >> > >> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Gilles <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > Déjá vus are actually well explained in the latest New Scientist, very > >> > cool stuff :) > >> > >> > I think you might want to highlight JQuery 1.3.2 and DOM instead of > >> > JQuery 1.2.6 tho as the performanace improved dramatically since then. > >> > >> > But I just don't get what you are saying by saying that libraries (not > >> > talking about JQuery only, cos I am only a user) are not optimized for > >> > IE. Any libraries will have a huge amount of lines that are dedicated > >> > to IE, cos IE just can't use standards properly. Unless of course as > >> > usual I don't get it cos the translation doesn't go well lol > >> > >> > If it wasn't for IE the number of check in libraries would be smaller > >> > and libraries would probably be faster lol > >> > >> > On Apr 2, 11:05 am, Andrea Giammarchi <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > dejavou ... I am not blaming any library and obviously it is not > possible > >> > to > >> > > match manual tasks speed but Internet Explorer is not optimized at > all, > >> > > that's the point. > >> > >> > > That TaskSpeed is performing truly common operation like remove, > append, > >> > > prepend, before, after, creation, etc ... and results against other > >> > > libraries ( except for Prototype ) are clear in my blog post: > >> >http://webreflection.blogspot.com/2009/04/taskspeed-dom-vs-libraries.. > .. > >> > >> > > Here a summary of Internet Explorer results: > >> > >> > > Internet Explorer 6 > >> > > ------------------------ > >> > > library | ms > >> > > ------------------------ > >> > > DOM *3966* > >> > > Dojo 1.2.3 22750 > >> > > plugd-a (Dojo) 24189 > >> > > Dojo 1.3.0 24249 > >> > > jQuery 1.3.2 44314 > >> > > MooTools 1.2.1 69346 > >> > > jQuery 1.2.6 *104407* > >> > >> > > Internet Explorer 7 > >> > > ------------------------ > >> > > library | ms > >> > > ------------------------ > >> > > DOM *612* > >> > > Dojo 1.2.3 3641 > >> > > plugd-a (Dojo) 3748 > >> > > Dojo 1.3.0 3861 > >> > > jQuery 1.3.2 5031 > >> > > MooTools 1.2.1 7658 > >> > > jQuery 1.2.6 *10468* > >> > >> > > Internet Explorer 8 > >> > > ------------------------ > >> > > library | ms > >> > > ------------------------ > >> > > DOM *499* > >> > > Dojo 1.3.0 2327 > >> > > plugd-a (Dojo) 2455 > >> > > Dojo 1.2.3 2922 > >> > > jQuery 1.3.2 3170 > >> > > MooTools 1.2.1 5876 > >> > > jQuery 1.2.6 *7049* > >> > >> > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Gilles <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > > > It would be good to see DOM speed results compare to other > libraries > >> > > > and see which libraries comes the closest to it. But I would never > >> > > > expect any library to match it on all tests. But then again that > >> > > > TaskSpeed test only take into consideration few basics tests and > not > >> > > > the overall performance of akll the functionalities within a > library. > > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jQuery Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
