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

Re: [jslint] JSLint using Spidermonkey

Expand Messages
  • Arthur Blake
    Nice article-- Thanks for pointing it out! I wonder how much faster spidermonkey will be when using regular expressions in JS... 100 times??? Rhino is
    Message 1 of 17 , Jul 23, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Nice article-- Thanks for pointing it out! I wonder how much faster
      spidermonkey will be when using regular expressions in JS... 100 times???
      Rhino is notoriously slow with regexps... I might look into using
      spidermonkey for my tool, the compressorrater (
      http://compressorrater.thruhere.net). I currently use rhino to run the
      packer compressor, and it's extremely slow!!

      BTW, Java scripting has all the same speed issues as Rhino (since all it
      really is is a repackaged copy of rhino!)

      On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 2:00 PM, re miya <remiya_ws@...> wrote:

      >
      >
      > You don't need to use neither Rhino neither Spidermonkey.
      >
      > Java has scripting enabled since version 6.0, and it runs jslint just fine.
      >
      > The implementation takes no more than 8 lines of code.
      >
      > ________________________________
      > From: z_mikowski <z_mikowski@... <z_mikowski%40yahoo.com>>
      > To: jslint_com@yahoogroups.com <jslint_com%40yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Thursday, 23 July, 2009 18:04:55
      > Subject: [jslint] JSLint using Spidermonkey
      >
      >
      > This worked great on my Linux dev box, and I thought others might be
      > interested. This guy has employed spidermonkey to run jslint on Linux.
      > Easily :)
      >
      > http://whereisandy. com/code/ jslint/
      >
      > The only pitfall is the jslint he has packaged appears to be a few
      > revisions behind the most current from the web (similar to the Rhino and WHS
      > version, it appears). But for my purposes of automated QA, I found this
      > invaluable. I especially like the implementation as a unix filter.
      >
      > Sincerely, Mike
      >
      > ps I'm sure the author of the post might appreciate help with an update
      > (maybe I can help at some point).
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • blakesys
      (I posted this over 3 hours via email and for some reason it didn t come through) Nice article-- Thanks for pointing it out! I wonder how much faster
      Message 2 of 17 , Jul 23, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        (I posted this over 3 hours via email and for some reason it didn't come through)

        Nice article-- Thanks for pointing it out! I wonder how much faster spidermonkey will be when using regular expressions in JS... 100 times??? Rhino is notoriously slow with regexps... I might look into using spidermonkey for my tool, the compressorrater (http://compressorrater.thruhere.net). I currently use rhino to run the packer compressor, and it's extremely slow!!

        BTW, Java scripting has all the same speed issues as Rhino (since all it really is is a repackaged copy of rhino!)

        --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, dom@... wrote:
        >
        > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:00:55AM -0700, re miya wrote:
        > > You don't need to use neither Rhino neither Spidermonkey.
        > >
        > > Java has scripting enabled since version 6.0, and it runs jslint just fine.
        > >
        > > The implementation takes no more than 8 lines of code.
        >
        > Internally, that's still calling rhino. And it doesn't mitigate the
        > startup time of the JVM.
        >
        > -Dom
        >
      • z_mikowski
        Your welcome! Hope this helps. Note I am /not/ the original author of http://whereisandy.com/code/jsline; just someone that wanted to add jslint to build
        Message 3 of 17 , Jul 24, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Your welcome! Hope this helps. Note I am /not/ the original author of http://whereisandy.com/code/jsline; just someone that wanted to add jslint to build testing.

          The main point of the article appears to be the speed of the spidermonkey implementation. Conceptually, with less interpreters in the chain, things should go faster.

          jslint -> spidermonkey -> machine code
          jslint -> rhino -> java -> byte code -> machine code

          Of course some aspects of the java implementation can be mitigated by keeping a copy memory resident for batch operations. However, even with that, one of spidermonkey's primary benefits are its speed (witness FF3.5).

          Its also reassuring to me to use a javascript engine actually employed by one of my target browsers.

          This was very easy to implement given the code in the link. It took exactly, um, 0 lines of code. Just had to install spidermonkey and set jslint.js to executable.

          Sincerely, Mike

          --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Arthur Blake <arthur.blake@...> wrote:
          >
          > Nice article-- Thanks for pointing it out! I wonder how much faster
          > spidermonkey will be when using regular expressions in JS... 100 times???
          > Rhino is notoriously slow with regexps... I might look into using
          > spidermonkey for my tool, the compressorrater (
          > http://compressorrater.thruhere.net). I currently use rhino to run the
          > packer compressor, and it's extremely slow!!
          >
          > BTW, Java scripting has all the same speed issues as Rhino (since all it
          > really is is a repackaged copy of rhino!)
          >
          > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 2:00 PM, re miya <remiya_ws@...> wrote:
          >
          > >
          > >
          > > You don't need to use neither Rhino neither Spidermonkey.
          > >
          > > Java has scripting enabled since version 6.0, and it runs jslint just fine.
          > >
          > > The implementation takes no more than 8 lines of code.
          > >
          > > ________________________________
          > > From: z_mikowski <z_mikowski@... <z_mikowski%40yahoo.com>>
          > > To: jslint_com@yahoogroups.com <jslint_com%40yahoogroups.com>
          > > Sent: Thursday, 23 July, 2009 18:04:55
          > > Subject: [jslint] JSLint using Spidermonkey
          > >
          > >
          > > This worked great on my Linux dev box, and I thought others might be
          > > interested. This guy has employed spidermonkey to run jslint on Linux.
          > > Easily :)
          > >
          > > http://whereisandy. com/code/ jslint/
          > >
          > > The only pitfall is the jslint he has packaged appears to be a few
          > > revisions behind the most current from the web (similar to the Rhino and WHS
          > > version, it appears). But for my purposes of automated QA, I found this
          > > invaluable. I especially like the implementation as a unix filter.
          > >
          > > Sincerely, Mike
          > >
          > > ps I'm sure the author of the post might appreciate help with an update
          > > (maybe I can help at some point).
          > >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
        • Michael Newton
          And just in case Mac users hadn t noticed, Spidermonkey is available as part of MacPorts: sudo port install spidermonkey ________________________________ From:
          Message 4 of 17 , Jul 24, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            And just in case Mac users hadn't noticed, Spidermonkey is available as part of MacPorts:

            sudo port install spidermonkey





            ________________________________
            From: z_mikowski <z_mikowski@...>
            To: jslint_com@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 12:58:09 PM
            Subject: Re: [jslint] JSLint using Spidermonkey


            Your welcome! Hope this helps. Note I am /not/ the original author of http://whereisandy. com/code/ jsline; just someone that wanted to add jslint to build testing.

            The main point of the article appears to be the speed of the spidermonkey implementation. Conceptually, with less interpreters in the chain, things should go faster.

            jslint -> spidermonkey -> machine code
            jslint -> rhino -> java -> byte code -> machine code

            Of course some aspects of the java implementation can be mitigated by keeping a copy memory resident for batch operations. However, even with that, one of spidermonkey' s primary benefits are its speed (witness FF3.5).

            Its also reassuring to me to use a javascript engine actually employed by one of my target browsers.

            This was very easy to implement given the code in the link. It took exactly, um, 0 lines of code. Just had to install spidermonkey and set jslint.js to executable.

            Sincerely, Mike

            --- In jslint_com@yahoogro ups.com, Arthur Blake <arthur.blake@ ...> wrote:
            >
            > Nice article-- Thanks for pointing it out! I wonder how much faster
            > spidermonkey will be when using regular expressions in JS... 100 times???
            > Rhino is notoriously slow with regexps... I might look into using
            > spidermonkey for my tool, the compressorrater (
            > http://compressorra ter.thruhere. net). I currently use rhino to run the
            > packer compressor, and it's extremely slow!!
            >
            > BTW, Java scripting has all the same speed issues as Rhino (since all it
            > really is is a repackaged copy of rhino!)
            >
            > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 2:00 PM, re miya <remiya_ws@. ..> wrote:
            >
            > >
            > >
            > > You don't need to use neither Rhino neither Spidermonkey.
            > >
            > > Java has scripting enabled since version 6.0, and it runs jslint just fine.
            > >
            > > The implementation takes no more than 8 lines of code.
            > >
            > > ____________ _________ _________ __
            > > From: z_mikowski <z_mikowski@ ... <z_mikowski% 40yahoo.com> >
            > > To: jslint_com@yahoogro ups.com <jslint_com% 40yahoogroups. com>
            > > Sent: Thursday, 23 July, 2009 18:04:55
            > > Subject: [jslint] JSLint using Spidermonkey
            > >
            > >
            > > This worked great on my Linux dev box, and I thought others might be
            > > interested. This guy has employed spidermonkey to run jslint on Linux.
            > > Easily :)
            > >
            > > http://whereisandy. com/code/ jslint/
            > >
            > > The only pitfall is the jslint he has packaged appears to be a few
            > > revisions behind the most current from the web (similar to the Rhino and WHS
            > > version, it appears). But for my purposes of automated QA, I found this
            > > invaluable. I especially like the implementation as a unix filter.
            > >
            > > Sincerely, Mike
            > >
            > > ps I'm sure the author of the post might appreciate help with an update
            > > (maybe I can help at some point).

            .

            __,


            __________________________________________________________________
            Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr!

            http://www.flickr.com/gift/

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • dom@happygiraffe.net
            ... Don t dismiss the speed of the JVM idly. It s usually a lot faster than you expect, _when running_. The startup time is still poor, but the speed when
            Message 5 of 17 , Jul 24, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 06:58:09PM -0000, z_mikowski wrote:
              > The main point of the article appears to be the speed of the
              > spidermonkey implementation. Conceptually, with less interpreters in
              > the chain, things should go faster.
              >
              > jslint -> spidermonkey -> machine code
              > jslint -> rhino -> java -> byte code -> machine code

              Don't dismiss the speed of the JVM idly. It's usually a lot faster than
              you expect, _when running_. The startup time is still poor, but the
              speed when you have HotSpot up and running is very good.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HotSpot

              > Of course some aspects of the java implementation can be mitigated by
              > keeping a copy memory resident for batch operations. However, even
              > with that, one of spidermonkey's primary benefits are its speed
              > (witness FF3.5).

              That speed increase comes from tracemonkey. I'm not sure if this as
              percolated into the spidermonkey builds that are available yet. As with
              all such things, measure in detail if you care.

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracemonkey#TraceMonkey

              In fact, a quick look at <http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/js>
              shows that spidermonkey 1.7.0 was released on 19-Oct-2007, well before
              tracemonkey was around. There's a 1.8.0-rc1 in that directory, but
              according to the release notes at
              <https://developer.mozilla.org/En/SpiderMonkey/1.8>, that still doesn't
              include the tracemonkey work.

              -Dom
            • z_mikowski
              Thanks Dom. As a mod_perl developer, I m keen on cached byte code, but really haven t kept up with all the details on JVM optimizations :) To be fair, speed
              Message 6 of 17 , Jul 25, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Thanks Dom.

                As a mod_perl developer, I'm keen on cached byte code, but really haven't kept up with all the details on JVM optimizations :) To be fair, speed really isn't that important to me right now. If it becomes an issue with automated builds, then I will re-approach and share my experience here.

                http://code.google.com/p/jslint4java/ sounds really good. Since it is more current than the version I'm currently running, I may give it a spin. Thank you for sharing!

                Sincerely, Mike


                --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, dom@... wrote:
                >
                > On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 06:58:09PM -0000, z_mikowski wrote:
                > > The main point of the article appears to be the speed of the
                > > spidermonkey implementation. Conceptually, with less interpreters in
                > > the chain, things should go faster.
                > >
                > > jslint -> spidermonkey -> machine code
                > > jslint -> rhino -> java -> byte code -> machine code
                >
                > Don't dismiss the speed of the JVM idly. It's usually a lot faster than
                > you expect, _when running_. The startup time is still poor, but the
                > speed when you have HotSpot up and running is very good.
                >
                > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HotSpot
                >
                > > Of course some aspects of the java implementation can be mitigated by
                > > keeping a copy memory resident for batch operations. However, even
                > > with that, one of spidermonkey's primary benefits are its speed
                > > (witness FF3.5).
                >
                > That speed increase comes from tracemonkey. I'm not sure if this as
                > percolated into the spidermonkey builds that are available yet. As with
                > all such things, measure in detail if you care.
                >
                > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracemonkey#TraceMonkey
                >
                > In fact, a quick look at <http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/js>
                > shows that spidermonkey 1.7.0 was released on 19-Oct-2007, well before
                > tracemonkey was around. There's a 1.8.0-rc1 in that directory, but
                > according to the release notes at
                > <https://developer.mozilla.org/En/SpiderMonkey/1.8>, that still doesn't
                > include the tracemonkey work.
                >
                > -Dom
                >
              • Re Miya
                ... What is worth considering here is not the JVM startup time (which actually is not that much), but that the implementation is OS independent. You write it
                Message 7 of 17 , Jul 29, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, dom@... wrote:
                  >
                  > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:00:55AM -0700, re miya wrote:
                  > > You don't need to use neither Rhino neither Spidermonkey.
                  > >
                  > > Java has scripting enabled since version 6.0, and it runs jslint just fine.
                  > >
                  > > The implementation takes no more than 8 lines of code.
                  >
                  > Internally, that's still calling rhino. And it doesn't mitigate the
                  > startup time of the JVM.
                  >
                  > -Dom
                  >

                  What is worth considering here is not the JVM startup time (which actually is not that much), but that the implementation is OS independent. You write it once and it runs everywhere. And running it out of the box without using Rhino as a separate package, removes the limits imposed by using it.
                • Arthur Blake
                  I know this is getting a little off-topic, but I still think it s related and relevant to JSLint. With preliminary testing, using spidermonkey instead of Java
                  Message 8 of 17 , Aug 1 7:04 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I know this is getting a little off-topic, but I still think it's related
                    and relevant to JSLint. With preliminary testing, using spidermonkey
                    instead of Java 6 scripting (aka Rhino), I am seeing a speedup factor of
                    about 20x. This is really significant, because I can compress a large file
                    (using Dean Edwards packer) algorithm that previously took about 40 seconds,
                    in about 2 seconds with spidermonkey! This allows the packer compressor to
                    actually compress faster than the YUI compressor in some cases! I'll be
                    updating the compressorater to use spidermonkey soon.

                    On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Re Miya <remiya_ws@...> wrote:

                    >
                    >
                    > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com <jslint_com%40yahoogroups.com>, dom@...
                    > wrote:
                    > >
                    > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:00:55AM -0700, re miya wrote:
                    > > > You don't need to use neither Rhino neither Spidermonkey.
                    > > >
                    > > > Java has scripting enabled since version 6.0, and it runs jslint just
                    > fine.
                    > > >
                    > > > The implementation takes no more than 8 lines of code.
                    > >
                    > > Internally, that's still calling rhino. And it doesn't mitigate the
                    > > startup time of the JVM.
                    > >
                    > > -Dom
                    > >
                    >
                    > What is worth considering here is not the JVM startup time (which actually
                    > is not that much), but that the implementation is OS independent. You write
                    > it once and it runs everywhere. And running it out of the box without using
                    > Rhino as a separate package, removes the limits imposed by using it.
                    >
                    >
                    >


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Dominic Mitchell
                    ... That s very interesting. Just out of curiosity, how much of that is down to startup time? If you do some start/end timing in the code, how long does it
                    Message 9 of 17 , Aug 1 11:44 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      On 1 Aug 2009, at 15:04, Arthur Blake wrote:

                      > I know this is getting a little off-topic, but I still think it's
                      > related
                      > and relevant to JSLint. With preliminary testing, using spidermonkey
                      > instead of Java 6 scripting (aka Rhino), I am seeing a speedup
                      > factor of
                      > about 20x. This is really significant, because I can compress a
                      > large file
                      > (using Dean Edwards packer) algorithm that previously took about 40
                      > seconds,
                      > in about 2 seconds with spidermonkey! This allows the packer
                      > compressor to
                      > actually compress faster than the YUI compressor in some cases!
                      > I'll be
                      > updating the compressorater to use spidermonkey soon.


                      That's very interesting. Just out of curiosity, how much of that is
                      down to startup time? If you do some start/end timing in the code,
                      how long does it take to execute the compressor.

                      The reason I ask is that I noticed it took jsilnt4java a significant
                      amount of time to 1) load the JVM and 2) parse fulljslint.js. The
                      actual validation took very little time in comparison.

                      -Dom

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Arthur Blake
                      None of my timing includes startup time- as my application is a server (web app) and it s always running, more or less... ... [Non-text portions of this
                      Message 10 of 17 , Aug 2 6:14 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        None of my timing includes startup time- as my application is a server (web
                        app) and it's always running, more or less...

                        On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 2:44 AM, Dominic Mitchell <dom@...>wrote:

                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > On 1 Aug 2009, at 15:04, Arthur Blake wrote:
                        >
                        > > I know this is getting a little off-topic, but I still think it's
                        > > related
                        > > and relevant to JSLint. With preliminary testing, using spidermonkey
                        > > instead of Java 6 scripting (aka Rhino), I am seeing a speedup
                        > > factor of
                        > > about 20x. This is really significant, because I can compress a
                        > > large file
                        > > (using Dean Edwards packer) algorithm that previously took about 40
                        > > seconds,
                        > > in about 2 seconds with spidermonkey! This allows the packer
                        > > compressor to
                        > > actually compress faster than the YUI compressor in some cases!
                        > > I'll be
                        > > updating the compressorater to use spidermonkey soon.
                        >
                        > That's very interesting. Just out of curiosity, how much of that is
                        > down to startup time? If you do some start/end timing in the code,
                        > how long does it take to execute the compressor.
                        >
                        > The reason I ask is that I noticed it took jsilnt4java a significant
                        > amount of time to 1) load the JVM and 2) parse fulljslint.js. The
                        > actual validation took very little time in comparison.
                        >
                        > -Dom
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >
                        >
                        >


                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • dom@happygiraffe.net
                        ... Thank you -- that s even more impressive. -Dom
                        Message 11 of 17 , Aug 2 2:02 PM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 09:14:22AM -0400, Arthur Blake wrote:
                          > None of my timing includes startup time- as my application is a server (web
                          > app) and it's always running, more or less...

                          Thank you -- that's even more impressive.

                          -Dom
                        • Arthur Blake
                          Yeah, it s amazing how fast spidermonkey is... the latest versions that have tracemonkey rival native C code:Great blog post about it (almost a year old
                          Message 12 of 17 , Aug 2 8:46 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Yeah, it's amazing how fast spidermonkey is... the latest versions that have
                            tracemonkey rival native C code:Great blog post about it (almost a year old
                            now...) here: http://ejohn.org/blog/tracemonkey/

                            On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 5:02 PM, <dom@...> wrote:

                            >
                            >
                            > On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 09:14:22AM -0400, Arthur Blake wrote:
                            > > None of my timing includes startup time- as my application is a server
                            > (web
                            > > app) and it's always running, more or less...
                            >
                            > Thank you -- that's even more impressive.
                            >
                            > -Dom
                            >
                            >
                            >


                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • mnewton32@yahoo.ca
                            Has anyone been able to get the modified JSLint running with a TraceMonkey-enabled build of SpiderMonkey? SpiderMonkey 1.7 is a few years old at this point. So
                            Message 13 of 17 , Aug 2 9:05 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Has anyone been able to get the modified JSLint running with a TraceMonkey-enabled build of SpiderMonkey? SpiderMonkey 1.7 is a few years old at this point. So I tried building it from the mozilla-central repository and the Firefox 3.51 tarball. Both times I got errors in the readline() loop. Otherwise the builds seem fine.

                              Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network

                              -----Original Message-----
                              From: Arthur Blake <arthur.blake@...>

                              Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 23:46:30
                              To: <jslint_com@yahoogroups.com>
                              Subject: Re: [jslint] JSLint using Spidermonkey


                              Yeah, it's amazing how fast spidermonkey is... the latest versions that have
                              tracemonkey rival native C code:Great blog post about it (almost a year old
                              now...) here: http://ejohn.org/blog/tracemonkey/

                              On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 5:02 PM, <dom@...> wrote:

                              >
                              >
                              > On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 09:14:22AM -0400, Arthur Blake wrote:
                              > > None of my timing includes startup time- as my application is a server
                              > (web
                              > > app) and it's always running, more or less...
                              >
                              > Thank you -- that's even more impressive.
                              >
                              > -Dom
                              >
                              >
                              >


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Arthur Blake
                              I got the spidermonkey tips to build and work fine... although I haven t tried it with JSLint. But I m sure it would work fine. It seems pretty stable,
                              Message 14 of 17 , Aug 2 10:51 PM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                I got the spidermonkey tips to build and work fine... although I haven't
                                tried it with JSLint. But I'm sure it would work fine. It seems pretty
                                stable, although it is not a release build by any means...
                                I am in the process of trying to get the TraceMonkey version in FF 3.52 to
                                build as well. If you figure it out before I do, post back here. I'll try
                                to do the same.
                                BTW, I solved the newline problem just by passing in my command object,
                                encapsulated as JSON... that way you can pass everything you want on one big
                                line and not worry about decoding newlines in the stream.

                                On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 12:05 AM, <mnewton32@...> wrote:

                                >
                                >
                                > Has anyone been able to get the modified JSLint running with a
                                > TraceMonkey-enabled build of SpiderMonkey? SpiderMonkey 1.7 is a few years
                                > old at this point. So I tried building it from the mozilla-central
                                > repository and the Firefox 3.51 tarball. Both times I got errors in the
                                > readline() loop. Otherwise the builds seem fine.
                                >
                                > Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
                                >
                                > -----Original Message-----
                                > From: Arthur Blake <arthur.blake@... <arthur.blake%40gmail.com>>
                                >
                                > Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2009 23:46:30
                                > To: <jslint_com@yahoogroups.com <jslint_com%40yahoogroups.com>>
                                > Subject: Re: [jslint] JSLint using Spidermonkey
                                >
                                >
                                > Yeah, it's amazing how fast spidermonkey is... the latest versions that
                                > have
                                > tracemonkey rival native C code:Great blog post about it (almost a year old
                                >
                                > now...) here: http://ejohn.org/blog/tracemonkey/
                                >
                                > On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 5:02 PM, <dom@...<dom%40happygiraffe.net>>
                                > wrote:
                                >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 09:14:22AM -0400, Arthur Blake wrote:
                                > > > None of my timing includes startup time- as my application is a server
                                > > (web
                                > > > app) and it's always running, more or less...
                                > >
                                > > Thank you -- that's even more impressive.
                                > >
                                > > -Dom
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                >
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                >
                                >
                                >


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.