Dear everybody & especially Martin, qooxdoo databinding is based on the transformation of plain javascript objects into qooxdoo objects, which involves a very complex operation which adds getters & setters, event listeners, many hidden properties and so on. >From then on, the data "monitors itself", i.e. changes of data will result in events. This differentiates qooxdoo from other frameworks, where the data itself is "dumb", and all events are thrown by the operating methods. There probably is some computer science vocabulary to describe these different approaches (and I'd be interested to learn how this is properly described).
Obviously, these different approaches involve a hugely different use of memory & overhead, at least it appears to me. Turning megabytes of raw data, it would seem to me, must produce gigantic object trees. Or are modern browsers and the prototypical inheritance pattern so efficient that this doesn't really matter, or at least in a way that is acceptable, given the advantages of "smart" data? I'd be interested in your experiences here. Do you have benchmarks or experience with really huge datasets? Thanks for any feedback, Christian -- View this message in context: http://qooxdoo.678.n2.nabble.com/qx-databinding-memory-consumption-tp7371247p7371247.html Sent from the qooxdoo mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/ _______________________________________________ qooxdoo-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
