> This is where I was taking issue before. You incur no real performance or
> memory hits by keeping an extra reference (if you wanted a local caching
> policy for a class, that is). 2 references to the same object do not more
> memory take.

There is no reason to maintain two separate caches where one will
suffice. It is messier, and I really question your claim that there is
no real performance hit. If you check out my test page, you will see
that the 6194 code is considerably slower in adding and removing
observers than the original prototype code (it is worth it though to
do proper cleanup). Obviously, looking up, adding and removing
references takes time, and doing this twice will take... twice as much

> Good luck with the patch.

Thanks. :)


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to