Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

[jslint] Re: Actual JavaScript Engine Performance

Expand Messages
  • Douglas Crockford
    ... Try the experiment yourself.
    Message 1 of 18 , Apr 21 5:17 PM
      --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Jean-Charles Meyrignac <jcmeyrignac@...> wrote:
      >
      > I'm sorry, but this is not an answer to my question.
      >
      > How did you compute the benchmark ?
      >
      > Did you run JSLint 10 times on every browser, removed the slowest and faster
      > runs, and computed the average of the remaining runs ? (I think that this is
      > the standard method to compute benchmarks).
      >
      > Or did you run the program once, and just displayed the time it took to run
      > the program ?
      >
      > Browsers tend to be slow when you start them, and Chrome is very slow when
      > you open a window (see how much memory it consumes !).
      > I guess also that their JS engine may be slower to generate assembly code,
      > but probably does a better job at optimizing it.
      > On the other hand, and I hope I'm not wrong, JSLint doesn't heavily execute
      > loops, so converting it to assembly code should not be very efficient.
      >
      > Another thing is that, in order to appear fast, the browsers tend to redraw
      > the loaded page frequently, and this slows down the Javascript engine.
      >
      > In the case of Chrome, the 2.801 seconds may be an artefact.

      Try the experiment yourself.
    • Jean-Charles Meyrignac
      Here are my timings, I have an old laptop with Windows 7 64-bits: Firefox 4.0: 0.807 seconds IE 9: 1.113 seconds Chrome: 1.867 seconds I guess that the
      Message 2 of 18 , Apr 21 5:24 PM
        Here are my timings, I have an old laptop with Windows 7 64-bits:

        Firefox 4.0: 0.807 seconds
        IE 9: 1.113 seconds
        Chrome: 1.867 seconds

        I guess that the rendering is slow, because the result page is large.

        JC

        On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 2:17 AM, Douglas Crockford <douglas@...>wrote:

        >
        >
        > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Jean-Charles Meyrignac <jcmeyrignac@...>
        > wrote:
        > >
        >
        > Try the experiment yourself.
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Douglas Crockford
        ... That is in line with my results. ... Rendering is not a factor. It only measures JavaScript execution. Chrome executes slower.
        Message 3 of 18 , Apr 21 5:30 PM
          --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Jean-Charles Meyrignac <jcmeyrignac@...> wrote:

          > Here are my timings, I have an old laptop with Windows 7 64-bits:
          >
          > Firefox 4.0: 0.807 seconds
          > IE 9: 1.113 seconds
          > Chrome: 1.867 seconds

          That is in line with my results.

          > I guess that the rendering is slow, because the result page is large.

          Rendering is not a factor. It only measures JavaScript execution.
          Chrome executes slower.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.