jQuery vs. My Library
in [JavaScript]
|
From: john on 22 Jan 2010 21:54 On 22 Jan 8:09 PM, David Mark wrote: >> john wrote: >> sorry for the confusion. > > BP. what does "BP" stand for? boiling point? badly played? ballpark? best practice? blood pressure? British Petroleum?
From: Scott Sauyet on 22 Jan 2010 22:29 On Jan 22, 8:59 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Scott Sauyet wrote: >> On Jan 22, 5:56 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Face it. I called your bluff. > > And you fell right on your face (again). You only tested a fast machine > and you weren't testing the right thing at all. The QSA branches will > always be about the same (and My Library's QSA-less implementation is > almost as fast as they are). How do you like that? You heard it here first, folks! The latest version of David Mark's My Library runs faster on old machine running browsers nobody uses against those selectors he deigns to support than do two year old versions of the more widely-used libraries, at least when he tweaks the test framework every most one else uses intact! And this is how he proves that his library is better. I'm finding less and less of a reason to even try My Library. Try as hard as you might to deny this, that is what your posts are claiming. -- Scott
From: Scott Sauyet on 22 Jan 2010 22:42 On Jan 22, 9:36 pm, RobG <rg...(a)iinet.net.au> wrote: > On Jan 23, 11:35 am, Scott Sauyet <scott.sau...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> http://scott.sauyet.com/Javascript/Test/slickspeed/2010-01-22a/ >> http://scott.sauyet.com/Javascript/Test/slickspeed/2010-01-22b/ > > I ran the tests on iPhone - they seem to work OK, but for some reason > the results are set a huge distance down the page so it takes several > minutes to scroll to them. Can you fix that please? The result tables > appear briefly just after the text, but then are shifted so it appears > to be something to do with the default CSS being altered by script. This is not something I can comfortably fix. The slickspeed tests are maintained by the MooTools team. The original test is here: http://mootools.net/slickspeed/ And it has a Subversion repository here: http://slickspeed.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ This is easily posted on any PHP-enabled server. It offers a config file to supply the libraries you want to compare and a text file to hold your selectors. But if I try to alter even the output format, I think people used to these slick-speed tests would start to doubt them. Obviously if you want to do that yourself, it would not be hard to do, but I'm not sure how others would take your tests. -- Scott
From: Scott Sauyet on 22 Jan 2010 22:42 On Jan 22, 8:59 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Scott Sauyet wrote: >> Or -- excuse me, maybe I misunderstood -- did you >> perhaps mean to imply that My Library is the lobotomized script? > > Obviously not. But you might want to consider one the way you are going > here. ;) Did you hear nothing Richard told you about speed tests? Yes, Richard is right that performance testing on the most powerful machines is not the right way to do micro-benchmarking. But for comparisons of libraries, the point is to test their relative speeds in whatever environments you care about. Perhaps for you, testing Firefox 1 on an eight-year old machine is relevant. I don't find it so, myself. -- Scott
From: Scott Sauyet on 22 Jan 2010 22:44
On Jan 22, 10:29 pm, Scott Sauyet <scott.sau...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 22, 8:59 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Scott Sauyet wrote: > >> On Jan 22, 5:56 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Face it. I called your bluff. > > > And you fell right on your face (again). You only tested a fast machine > > and you weren't testing the right thing at all. The QSA branches will > > always be about the same (and My Library's QSA-less implementation is > > almost as fast as they are). How do you like that? > > You heard it here first, folks! The latest version of David Mark's My > Library runs faster on old machine running browsers nobody uses > against those selectors he deigns to support than do two year old > versions of the more widely-used libraries, at least when he tweaks > the test framework every most one else uses intact! And this is how > he proves that his library is better. I'm finding less and less of a > reason to even try My Library. > > Try as hard as you might to deny this, that is what your posts are > claiming. > > -- Scott err, "the test framework most everyone else uses intact." :-) -- Scott |