On Sun, 03 Feb 2002 09:03:50 +0300, Mithgol the Webmaster wrote: > On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 04:26:53 -0400, Clarence Verge wrote:
>> > but this tends to be not so fast solution, since it needs an external APM >> > helper instead of plug-in engine. >> They end up being the same thing. Whether the external is faster or >> slower will depend on the type of code. > No. To execute a standalone .EXE, Arachne needs a task-swapping, and also a > temporarily file written. Not so. In some cases it DOES do that, but it doesn't HAVE to. > That's the case why GIF is faster than JPEG in > Arachne - GIFs are decoded and viewed internally by core, JPEGs need an > external helper application which writes a temporarily true color BMP. Not so. Arachne only displays BMPs so both must be converted. In fact, Arachne takes exactly the same time to convert and display a 8700 byte gif as she takes to READ and display a 308kbyte BMP. The method chosen to interface with the external Jpeg converter requires an external temporary file yes, but this in mainly because that converter is so big Arachne cannot stay in memory while it runs. BTW, these temporary BMPs are NEVER True Color on MY box. > Now it's an early February, right? Okay. I've already thought of making a > standalone executable file which would do the job. And I came to some > conclusion... such an executable will slow the things greatly, and will be > completely useless to develop any further. It won't ever be a solution which I > think we need: a JavaScript masquerade engine which can easily be developed > into a real JavaScript 1.1 support. > So, JS engine COMPLETELY independent from browser is UNREAL. Too bad you feel that way. There is probably some confusion about what is meant by independence here. Did you know that Arachne regularly launches executeables via the DOS exec function ? - thereby staying in memory - and these simply terminate when done thus allowing Arachne to continue where she left off ? We should talk about this elsewhere if you haven't given up completely. > It seems not so easy as it seemed. Imagine a JavaScript that modifies > some hidden content in HTML form (BTW, I wrote a complete working example on > Wed, 30 Jan 2002 20:41:52 +0300, and posted it to the list). I didn't see it ! And I *REALLY* didn't see the rest of this message ! I got this far reading while answering and noticed that the scrollbar was only 10% in length so I have decided to stop now. - Clarence Verge - Back to using Arachne V1.62 ....
