Hi,
my opinion is that we can make much more use of object literals internally.
Which means e.g. to say
var a = {x: 23.4, y: 42.4};
instead of
var a = new OpenLayers.Pixel(23.4, 42.4);
We can do this wherever we just pass on values, without the need to call any
memeber functions.
Regards,
Andreas.
On Oct 16, 2010, at 14:37 , Eric Lemoine wrote:
> Hi
>
> When defining the roadmap for OpenLayers 3 we mentioned drag/pan
> performance. Profiling with FireBug shows that a great deal of time is
> spent in the Class function, which is the inner function of
> OpenLayers.Class [*]. This is because (a) we create lots of objects
> (Bounds, LonLat) when panning, and (b) creating objects has a cost:
>
>>>> A = OpenLayers.Class({initialize: function() {}});
>>>> start = new Date; for(var i=0,l=100000; i<l; i++) { var a = new A;} stop =
>>>> new Date; console.log(stop.getTime()-start.getTime());
> 500
>
> If type A is defined using plain JavaScript then creating objects
> isn't as costly:
>
>>>> A = function() {};
>>>> start = new Date; for(var i=0,l=100000; i<l; i++) { var a = new A;} stop =
>>>> new Date; console.log(stop.getTime()-start.getTime());
>>>> 270
>
> So should we consider changing the way we create types in OpenLayers?
> (I'd think so.)
>
> First, for types that do not extend others, I think we should use
> plain JavaScript:
>
> A = function() {}; // constructor
> A.prototype = {}; // prototype definition
>
> For inheritance I'd suggest that we provide a simple function, whose
> usage would be something like this:
>
> // the super class
> P = function() {};
> // the sub-class
> C = function() {
> P.call(this); // to call parent constructor
> };
> OpenLayers.inherit(C, P);
>
> With OpenLayers.inherit looking like this:
>
> OpenLayers.inherit = function(C, P) {
> var F = function() {};
> F.prototype = P.prototype;
> C.prototype = new F;
>
> var i, l, o;
> for(i=2, l=arguments.length; i<l; i++) {
> o = arguments[i];
> if(typeof o === "function") {
> o = o.prototype;
> }
> OpenLayers.Util.extend(C.prototype, o);
> }
>
> return C;
> };
>
> With something like this we'd incur no performance penalty because of
> the way we create objects. Plus, this is simple, and reduces the size
> of the code a bit.
>
> Thoughts? Comments?
>
>
> [*]
> <http://github.com/openlayers/openlayers/blob/master/lib/OpenLayers/BaseTypes/Class.js#L22>
>
> --
> Eric Lemoine
>
> Camptocamp France SAS
> Savoie Technolac, BP 352
> 73377 Le Bourget du Lac, Cedex
>
> Tel : 00 33 4 79 44 44 96
> Mail : eric.lemo...@camptocamp.com
> http://www.camptocamp.com
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> d...@lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/openlayers-dev
--
Andreas Hocevar
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org/
Expert service straight from the developers.
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
d...@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/openlayers-dev
