Hey Hector,
What the *initial* release of our tests (which was the motivation for
SlickSpeed) did was to motivate all of the JS projects to improve the
selector speeds. If you notice, some libraries really shine in FireFox
because the use XPath for DOM selection while others, like jQuery, are
optimized for IE, the dominant browser out there.
For the immediate future, we're comfortable with the speed of the jQuery
selector engine and prefer to focus on enhancing other areas of the
project (eg: documentation & jQuery UI).
Rey...
Pops wrote:
Whoooooa! Rey, what a different between IE and FF.
I am not interested in the half-truths in any of this, but rather what
does the test show to improve jQuery, if anything?
--
HLS
On Nov 1, 1:59 pm, Rey Bango <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Prit,
Please do a search in the archives for this topic. Just as early as last
week, I posted a response to this.
Also, be sure to run the same test in IE so you can see totally
different results. My post goes into detail about that as well.
Thanks,
Rey...
prit wrote:
I have tried different javascript frameworks and I finally decided to
use jQuery because of the ease of use and all the good plugins
available.
But recently I noticed a websitehttp://mootools.net/slickspeed/which
compares 3 frameworks including jQuery. I ran the tests on that site
and noticed that they show jQuery as the slowest performer out of the
3 frameworks (Mootools, Prototype and jQuery).
Does anybody have comments on this ?
Thanks,
Prit
