Kent, sorry to not have the time right now for testing, I will however
do it in 1-2 weeks, and report the results.
Cheers,
Ron
Kent Tong wrote:
RonPiterman <rpiterman <at> gmx.net> writes:
Its not the download time, its the bootstrapping on each request which
makes things heavy...
Have you measured the time taken for dojo to bootstrap? That file is
only 14K and only defines a dozen of functions and some variables
(http://trac.dojotoolkit.org/browser/trunk/src/bootstrap1.js). I
am not sure this is going to slow down the browser.
If one does not need widgets but "just" wants to use EventListener and
async requests, maybe also client side validation, why not let the
programmer/community the ability to choose a JS framework implementation -
The questions are:
1) Is the other JS framework not subjected to the same bootstrap issue?
2) Is the effect to fix this issue in dojo larger than that of creating
& *maintaining* an abstraction layer?
I don't have much experience with scriptacuolus but it seems fair enough
to me to use - prototype has also some listener implementation, and as
much as dojo may be supperior, we pay a price for it, which we don't
have to pay... more important: it apears to me to be a solid criteria in
choosing a web framework - for a "normal" site, I find it hard ro
recommend a framework with such a slow responsiveness...
Is this experience based on the pre-packaged dojo.js or a bare mimimal
dojo?
--
Kent Tong
Author of a book for learning Tapestry (http://www.agileskills2.org/EWDT)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
