On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:45:06 -0800 "H. S. Teoh" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2012 at 12:34:13PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > > On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:10:42 -0800 > > Ellery Newcomer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Is anyone else noticing e.g. std.datetime taking upwards of 30 > > > seconds to render the blob of links at the top? It's freakin > > > freezing my entire browser. > > > > It only takes about a second or two for me in FF2. I'm not seeing > > any blob of links at the top though. > > 'cos you're running with JS turned off. :-) > <g> It makes the web 10x faster, 10x more practical and 10x less obnoxious - it's the "Make the web instantly better" checkbox ;) It's almost magical! > Also, I think the actual results depends on your system. If you have a > high-powered system you probably wouldn't notice too much lag. It > "only" takes about 3-4 seconds for me on a dual-core 3.4GHz Intel > machine. But older machines will probably see a bigger lag. > Yea, at the same time though, if it takes a dual-core 3.4GHz (with two levels of cache, out-of-order execution, pipelineing, branch prediction, SIMD, external GPU, etc) 3-4 seconds to render a few pages of formatted text, then something in computing has gone very, very wrong. > But anyway, I think all of this is kinda missing the point. The point > is that the blob of links at the top of the page is plain unhelpful. > It is only useful if you already know what you're looking for, in > which case you could just use your browser's search function to find > the matching text instead. Much more useful is a broken-down > categorization (with proper nesting, etc.) of the functions, classes, > structs, etc., of the module. Something like what std.algorithm does. > Looking at it with JS on, yea, I see what you mean now. Not so nice, not so helpful, and definitely not worth the rendering lag. The new-style baked-in summaries on pages like std.algorithm are much, much better.
