I would need to see some actual stats as to the performance hit of the jQuery file loading itself into memory before I had this concern.
My personal experience, even with very slow computers, is that I haven't seen a lag when loading a cached page with a cached jQuery file into memory. I have no doubt that the solution you propose would improve performance, but if it went from 0.032 seconds to 0.0012 seconds, I can't imagine that would be worth using a frameset and the other hassles and problems it could cause. If you are using the packed version of jquery which uses this sort of setup: eval(function(p,a,c,k,e,r)..... You could instead use the minified/gzipped method, which will reduce any eval overhead (in additional to making a smaller download). JK -----Original Message----- From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of S. Robert James Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 11:13 AM To: jQuery (English) Subject: [jQuery] Drastically reducing jQuery load time While working on a web app, I thought of this method to drastically reduce jQuery load time. Every link follow causes jQuery to be reloaded again. Now, although the .js file is stored in the local cache, it still needs to be parsed and executed, which takes a lot of time. What if, instead, we use a FRAMESET, keeping jQuery in the master frame, and just changing a child frame (which takes up the entire screen). This way, jQuery never needs to be reloaded. What does everyone say?
