Sean Catchpole wrote:
I hear a lot of discussion about how jQuery isn't that slow, the test
wasn't perfectly fair (what test is?), that keeping code small is
important, and that development time is the most important thing.
1) Lots of people take speed tests seriously, even if they're not a
good way to judge a libraries use.
I agree 100%
2) Making jQuery faster doesn't mean it has to be bigger in size, only
more clever.
I can't really speak to this one.
3) Development time is important, but so are viewer's patience. Slow
code is never good.
*Absolutely!* I could not agree more. I had a page where I was using a
bunch of selectors, and it was just plain slow. I switched to a
different methodology and it sped up (some... I think there are still
problems with my code on that page... but that's another topic :o)
I would like to see jQuery's speed improve. I don't want a bloated core,
but if the library stays relatively small (I know very subjective) say,
under 100K that wouldn't be too bad. Would it?
Chris
--
http://www.cjordan.us
