The place we can run into trouble using the FastStringMap techniques is with IE6 when there are a lot of other JS objects, because of its less-then-optimal garbage collection algorithms. However, IE has the nice property it doesn't lie to you about the value of isOwnProperty(), so we can use an alternative js string map implementation for IE.
I have also found that using a JsUniqueIdMap seems significantly faster then hash map, though I still need to prove that with more benchmarks, and is certainly smaller. On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 4:19 PM, Damon Lundin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > I realize I may be jumping in late to this discussion, but Bruce just > introduced me to this fine contributors group. At a talk during the > Google I/O conference, I mentioned the benefit of using the GWT > FastStringMap implementation over the HashMap implementation and I > decided to re-run my analysis for 1.5 to see if the 1.5 compiler was > smart enough to pick a faster implementation and unfortunately that > does not appear to be the case. I hope I'm not hijacking Emily's > thread, but I just thought some of you would find my (basic) data > interesting for HashMap vs. FastStringMap. > > I posted my results up on my company development blog if you don't > mind me not copy-and-pasting it all here: > > http://development.lombardi.com/?p=95 > > > > -- "There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't" --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
