Sorry, post sent by mistake YO was meant to be You don't even need to trust my testing methodology.
:-) On Apr 16, 5:09 pm, Pascal <[email protected]> wrote: > A bit in denial are we? Here are raw numbers for you. > > http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/innerhtml.html > > YO > > On Apr 16, 2:14 pm, Vitali Lovich <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Pascal <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > Creation of individual DOM elements in javascript seems to be pretty > > >> > slow > > >> > (it is a bit faster in the new generation browsers ff3, Safari4 and > > >> > chrome) > > >> > but setInnerHTML() doesn't create those elements in javascript, it is > > >> > done > > >> > natively in the browser and thus is much faster. > > > >> I'd need to see a benchmark that that is indeed the case. I don't > > >> have time right now (I'll experiment later if I have the chance). But > > >> it seems wrong that creating the DOM elements in javascript is slower > > >> than having the browser do it natively (the cost of modifying the DOM > > >> should be the dominant factor by far). > > > > Seriously, this is not even close. In IE for a table as small as 50 > > > rows with 15 columns, you're looking at a few seconds with the DOM and > > > below 100ms with innerHTML. (on a dev laptop here anyway). > > > Me thinks there might a problem with your testing methodology. First > > I think you're not taking into account the building of the string > > whereas you do time the widget creation. Secondly, if you have a > > constant 50 rows & 15 columns, see how long it takes to set the data > > once you've pre-created your widgets (this should actually be faster I > > think than innerHTML if you have HTML elements there). > > Thirdly IE is the slowest browser (Javascript is actually notoriously > > slower - not sure about DOM, but even that is still slower than any > > other browser). At least tell me you're testing with IE7 (which is > > still what, 2x slower than FF3.0 & 5 times slower than FF3.5). > > Fourthly, I'd prefer to use something like Firebug's profiling rather > > than trying to instrument my own code - it's far less likely you'll > > make a mistake or misinterpret the data I think. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
