Glad  you're still working on this -- it's a really good experiment of
the "I would never use this, but would it even work?" variety.

I'm  just  looking  over  your code now, but one "out of spec" issue I
think I see already is that you have to instantiate a Loader (for each
Class?),  and then get an instance of the Loader. This seems to depart
from  the simple goal of emulating 'new <classname>' where <classname>
doesn't  yet have an accompanying constructor defined. Maybe you could
document your jsFiddle? :)

More  optimistically, I don't necessarily agree with the "huge delays"
you  mention  in  your  follow-up  post. It all depends on what you're
comparing.  Compared  to having a constructor already loaded, sure, it
will  be  slower  to  load  an asset on-the-fly. But the goal of PHP's
__autoload  is  not  to  compete  performance-wise vs. having all your
classes  in  a single page -- that would simply not be possible -- but
to  offer  transparent  modular  loading  vs.  having to roll your own
dependency/switching logic for modular loading.

In  other words, the incoming assumption is that one-class-per-file or
one-package-per-file  is  going  to  be  in  use and the variables are
ease-of-use  and performance under that umbrella assumption. So making
the  same  assumption  w/JS, can you do transparent asset loading with
extreme  ease-of-use, while incurring minimal performance overhead (of
course  a  fairly  small  series  of  function  calls  in  JS can have
non-negligible overhead in some machines/browsers)?

Just food for thought.

-- S.



-- 
Subscription settings: 
http://groups.google.com/group/mootools-users/subscribe?hl=en

Reply via email to