From: Pascal B. <pa...@dy...> - 2001-02-16 17:23:10
|
yes, WE need to get this thing fixed.. Pascal Bestebroer pa...@dy... http://www.dynamic-core.net > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: dyn...@li... > [mailto:dyn...@li...]Namens Lasse Lindgård > Verzonden: vrijdag 16 februari 2001 15:00 > Aan: dyn...@li... > Onderwerp: RE: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer > > > More importantly than upfront performance: > Does it reduce the memory leak ? > > If not then performance will be on a freight train to swap-land in no time > anyways. > > My current DynAPI pages eat a meg or more pr. reload. It is not a big > problem at my 256mb machine. But just the thoughts of my clients 32mb > machines makes me shiver. > > Any news on the memoryleak front ? > Is anybody working on it at all or are everybody busy doing "cool" stuff > instead ? > > For DynAPI ever to be useful. We really need to get that memory problem > fixed. > > /Lasse > > > --__--__-- > > Message: 6 > From: "Eytan Heidingsfeld" <ey...@tr...> > To: "Dynapi-Dev" <dyn...@li...> > Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 14:18:56 +0200 > Subject: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer > Reply-To: dyn...@li... > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C09823.65DE2AF0 > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I'd love to test performance one against the other. The only test > I did was > create 100 layers and check the times. In IE TCanvas was 200 ms faster and > in NS it was 1300(canvas) to 10000(dynlayer). > > I'd love you guys to start tearing my canvas to shreds. > > Included in the zip are: > tcanvas.js > browser.js > > they need to be included in the document(working on adding .include) > > 8an > > > > _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing list > Dyn...@li... > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev > |