Hi.
Is there any consensus on which is more efficient in a for() loop?
I was taught that for ++i being the most efficient.
I've created 2 patches (++ and a +1) in case anyone is interested.
http://pastie.org/private/3rgonpsn90yjd17q9zwa
and
http://pastie.org/private/qufy3rwmaevxc1sysvq
From
++i; is a little more efficient in C language,
in javascript difference in performance of all these operators is tiny
On Dec 16, 3:21 pm, RQuadling rquadl...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi.
Is there any consensus on which is more efficient in a for() loop?
I was taught that for ++i being the most
Sorry you're having trouble.
This mailing list is reserved for development purposes. Please direct
assistance requests to http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous
Thank you.
Tobie
On Dec 16, 4:11 am, Wen wenchen@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
I was trying to use
I tried running your test on IE8 and it just kept prompting me with script
unresponsive.
Allen Madsen
http://www.allenmadsen.com
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 7:01 AM, Robert Kieffer bro...@gmail.com wrote:
I whipped up a quick JSLitmus test to try out a handful of empty loops
(using i++, ++i,
Unfortunately IE limits scripts to 5M statements, rather than limiting by
time. That limit was set back in the days of IE4, when 5M statements would
take ~10 seconds to run. But newer hardware/script engines hit that in a
fraction of a second now... which is why you're seeing it.
The workaround
