Not so much a review, as just a few (hopefully) useful comments:

I was really surprised by the fact that the cursor-based DOM-walking
code was faster than getElementById(). I've added this case to some of
my own tests, and saw (somewhat) similar results. From what I can tell,
it appears that the double-attachment (in the id-based case) is the
lion's share of the difference. If we can find a way to get rid of that,
they'll be a lot closer.

Jaime's point about measuring layout time (referred to as the "deferred
work after JS") is valid. In my own tests, instead of using
setTimeout(0), I just force a layout by measuring the offsetTop of the
bottom-most widget I create. This won't capture paint, but layout seems
to be the real monster most of the time.

One comment on the structure of the benchmark: It's a little confusing
to see a bunch of measurements on things that create *different*
resulting structures. It would be much clearer if these benchmarks were
grouped into clusters of tests that produce the same structures.

I've also got some similar benchmarks on various mechanisms for creating
a Wave list. They're a bit more from the Javascript perspective (only a
couple of GWT tests), trying to determine the fastest absolute mechanism
for creating a bunch of widget-like structures. But I'll merge them into
your own benchmarks once they're checked in.

http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/127801

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

Reply via email to