My IE7 was almost identical.
FF2 gave 219 293 (which meant that the non-tweaked version was faster)
Strange its all over the place.
Glen
On 10/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I got those results :
>
> FF 2.0.0.7
> final time (less is better) 941 653
>
> IE6 wi
I got those results :
FF 2.0.0.7
final time (less is better) 941 653
IE6 with SP2 and all updates
final time (less is better) 1108 955
So I guess the "modded" version increase between 20% up to 30% the
speed of the selectors.
Make your tries but thanks Glen for this try.
ps: sorry
Guy Fraser schrieb:
Glen Lipka wrote:
http://commadot.com/jquery/experiments/speedtest/#
I modified a version of jQuery to include that one line and it threw
a JS error.
Then I tried using the second way with the var doc = document and
renamed document everywhere to be doc.
No change at all
Glen Lipka wrote:
> http://commadot.com/jquery/experiments/speedtest/#
> I modified a version of jQuery to include that one line and it threw a
> JS error.
> Then I tried using the second way with the var doc = document and
> renamed document everywhere to be doc.
> No change at all in speed.
Ha
http://commadot.com/jquery/experiments/speedtest/#
I modified a version of jQuery to include that one line and it threw a JS
error.
Then I tried using the second way with the var doc = document and renamed
document everywhere to be doc.
No change at all in speed.
Glen
On 10/12/07, Glen Lipka <[EM
How much faster?
I can plug in a version of jQuery with that line and a version without that
line into the css selector speed test I guess to try.
Glen
On 10/11/07, luci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> http://dankogai.vox.com/library/post/one-liner-that-accelerates-javascript-on-ie.html
>
> Th
6 matches
Mail list logo
