RE: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer

SourceForge Headquarters 225 Broadway Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

Note that I'm only splitting browser specific code, not complete functions
into seperate files (something I'm strongly against)
You shouldn't split up source code that is created to make split-up-browsers
to work as one.. doesn't make sense, and will most likely cause problems
when supporting cross-browser code.

What other optimisations are you thinking about?   I've noticed alot of
email from people saying they have done this, or done that.. but they never
show any code, so please people.. if you did some optimising or other
ingenious code show us, and don't be so vague

Pascal Bestebroer
pa...@dy...
http://www.dynamic-core.net

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: dyn...@li...
> [mailto:dyn...@li...]Namens Bart Bizon
> Verzonden: zaterdag 17 februari 2001 13:10
> Aan: dyn...@li...
> Onderwerp: SV: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer
>
>
> Yes... and now we are again getting into the discussion of a
> split browser API.
> What you are proposing is taking a step in that direction..
>  I would take it on step further... and split up the code in
> different files alltogether (to minimize downloaded code and add clarity)
> ... but let's not dwell upon that... ;)
> I have been developing my SuperClass for some time now... and
> recently I have been doing a LOT of optimizing...
> so I'm getting to be very profitient in this area. And there is
> room for tons of optimization in DynAPI.
> But your suggestion is a very good start.
>
> >this is not how it should be done. Alot of methods in DynAPI contain if
> >statements for ie/ns checking.. you can optimize this by removing the IF
> >statements from the runtime loop, simple example of setX/setY:
> >
> >if (is.ns) {
> > DynLayer.prototype._setX=function(){ this.css.left=this.x;
> >this.pageX=this.getPageX() }
> > DynLayer.prototype._setY=function(){ this.css.top=this.y;
> >this.pageY=this.getPageY() }
> >} else {
> > DynLayer.prototype._setX=function(){ this.css.pixelLeft=this.x;
> >this.pageX=this.getPageX() }
> > DynLayer.prototype._setY=function(){ this.css.pixelTop=this.y;
> >this.pageY=this.getPageY() }
> >}
> >
> >
> >Your still assigning methods to the prototype, but at parse time, not run
> >time.. removing the IF statements, and speeding the execution of the code
> >(not by much, but it is an increase in speed)
> >
> >This can be done for multiple methods (setHTML, moveTo, setSizez, etc)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Pascal Bestebroer
> >pa...@dy...
> >http://www.dynamic-core.net
> >
> >> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> >> Van: dyn...@li...
> >> [mailto:dyn...@li...]Namens Bart Bizon
> >> Verzonden: vrijdag 16 februari 2001 23:18
> >> Aan: dyn...@li...
> >> Onderwerp: SV: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer
> >>
> >>
> >> true ... but by that definition you would expect windows programs
> >> to release memory by default... and the OS should handle it .. right?
> >> Which it doesn't.... it's not just DynAPI pages that swallow
> >> memory, ordinary pages do to...
> >> and so do many windows programs.
> >> (But... this is assuming that windows is actually a good OS...
> >> which it is... NOT)
> >> Taking this into account... you have to work with the conditions
> >> at hand...
> >>
> >> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
> >> Från: Pascal Bestebroer <pa...@dy...>
> >> Till: dyn...@li...
> <dyn...@li...>
> >> Datum: den 16 februari 2001 20:15
> >> Ämne: RE: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer
> >>
> >>
> >> >to be even less helpful here, I truly believe it can't be
> fixed, and that
> >> >it's an browser issue..
> >> >I truly hope I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the javascript
> >> interpreters
> >> >should automatically unload any memory no matter what.
> >> >This is how all (good) environments work) they get space to
> work in, and
> >> >once it's done that single memory block is freed.
> >> >
> >> >Maybe I'm wrong (and I truly hope so) but I won't be searching for a
> >> >solution on this.
> >> >
> >> >Pascal Bestebroer
> >> >pa...@dy...
> >> >http://www.dynamic-core.net
> >> >
> >> >> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> >> >> Van: dyn...@li...
> >> >> [mailto:dyn...@li...]Namens Michael Ellis
> >> >> Verzonden: vrijdag 16 februari 2001 19:25
> >> >> Aan: 'dyn...@li...'
> >> >> Onderwerp: RE: [Dynapi-Dev] TCanvas vs. DynLayer
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I agree... this is a huge problem. Pretty much makes the
> >> software unusable
> >> >> unless you have a ton of ram.
> >> >>
> >> >> I currently have a level-3 defect on the memory leak generated by
> >> >> DynAPI for
> >> >> a software product that is supposed to be out the door in a
> >> week. We have
> >> >> not successfully had any impact whatsoever on this issue to date.
> >> >>
> >> >> Anyone had any luck with this? Anyone have any ideas?
> >> >>
> >> >> Mike Ellis
> >> >>
> >> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> From: Lasse Lindgård [mailto:la...@li...]
> >> >> Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 07:00
> >> >> To: dyn...@li...
> >> >> Subject: 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
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >_______________________________________________
> >> >Dynapi-Dev mailing list
> >> >Dyn...@li...
> >> >http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Dynapi-Dev mailing list
> >> Dyn...@li...
> >> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Dynapi-Dev mailing list
> >Dyn...@li...
> >http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dynapi-Dev mailing list
> Dyn...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev
>