SlickSpeed...the gift and the curse...
On Oct 21, 2008, at 4:20 PM, nwhite wrote:
The selector speeds are trivial close to each other. The two that
are substantially faster as Jan pointed out cheat.
The hang up on selector speeds are crazy. When is the last time you
have made such heavy use of selectors? They come in handy but some
of these tests I have never seen in real world use. Most of the
selector rules can be optimized if you have even the slightest
awareness of your document structure.
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 4:03 PM, Oskar Krawczyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
I understand what you're saying Jan, however you need to see the thing
we're seeing – which is MooTools being on the fourth position in the
selector-speed race. And what we'd really like to see is MT being the
leader.
Personally, I'm really psyched to see the new selector engine in
action.
O.
On Oct 21, 7:58 pm, Jan Kassens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> He cheats. He caches elements, even though he cant cache when the
dom
> changes, so his results would have to be multiplied (slickspeed
fires
> each query 4 times, iirc).
>
> Btw. we will have a new Selector engine the next release (most
likely).
>
> -jan
>
> /me doesnt like to compare the libraries by the selectors, all
> libraries are fast enough already, so selector speed should not make
> you're decision, but rather features and code style
>
> On Oct 21, 2008, at 20:48, Danillo Cesar wrote:
>
>
>
> > Peppy new selector
> >http://jamesdonaghue.com/?p=40
>
> >http://jamesdonaghue.com/static/peppy/profile/slickspeed/
> > --
> > -----------------------------------------
> > Danillo César de O. Melo
> >www.sook.com.br
>
> --
> my blog:http://blog.kassens.net
