7 Apr
2004
7 Apr
'04
10:24 p.m.
John Allain wrote:
Kinda funky in it's present state. takes just
under two minutes to display
(read: display, not download). On this computer that's an estimated 80
billion clock cycles, or perhaps 4 billion instructions. Amazing that it
works. Yikes. Good luck on a rev.2 Thx for starting this.
Yes Javascript is not the fastest of languages. The code started out on
another project which had just a couple
of hundred entries. Its speed was quite acceptable and it had the
advantage of running offline by just saving the
page locally : all the data and code are in the page file.
I made some measurements and found that IE 6.0 was 5 times slower than
Mozilla 1.7. I made some changes
to the code and now the speeds are comparable. (No I did not put in
noops for Mozilla ;-)
Turns out that IE does not like appending to very large strings. In
developing the tables I would do a bunch of
appends for each row, with tracing I could see IE slow down as the table
got bigger. By building each row
separately and doing just one append per row, I got a five fold speed
improvement on IE. Mozilla still runs at
its old speed.
There are now just over 1000 patents in the list. It is definitely time
to set up a database....
My suggestion: display the default sortation/selection
as static html at the
bottom, for something to look at while the CPU chugs. CGI or PHP
would of course offload it all
Yes PHP is the way to go ;-)
-- HansP