It looks like a rewrite of Sizzle/jQuery. Very good performance with
cache on, I thought Peppy wouldn't be beaten so early.  Code is a bit
messy.

But is it reliable? Is there a test suite for it?
The 'nocache' version timed at 29 seconds for :nth-child(odd) in
slickspeed for me, and horrible performance overall.

Also there is something wrong in the SlickSpeed implementation.
Sizzle's results i.e. are far far different from it's own slickspeed
test at http://ejohn.org/apps/sizzle/speed/, with timings like 707ms
for a simple 'div p'. The slickspeed.js code has been largely altered.

" - Have you looked at the source code?"
I read this exact same sentence at the 'javascript' group (usenet)
about an year ago, about jQuery. That shouldn't be disencouraging :)

cheers,
- ricardo

On Jan 27, 7:45 pm, Elijah Insua <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 4:36 PM, KidsKilla .grin! wuz here <
>
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > 2009/1/28 John Resig <[email protected]>:
>
> > > A whole mess of problems:
> > >  - Caches queries with reckless abandon - this is incredibly bad on
> > > any sort of dynamic document (aka - all of jQuery)
> > it is, but maybe there is some way to recognize when we can use a
> > cache and when we can't. kinda
> > if(lastInnerHTML != document.body.innerHTML){
> >  resetCache()
> > }
>
> that method of cache expiry is pretty gruesome and is as bad (or worse!) as
> not having a cache at all.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"jQuery Development" 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/jquery-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to