Comments on: SquirrelFish: Technical excitement

By: Tribulus

Tribulus — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 17:34:27 +0000

Very intresting peice
will be very useful in our herbal bussiness

By: MCroft

MCroft — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 15:02:34 +0000

I have been doing tests with benchmark sites I located and I found that quite a few tests on XP returned either 0 ms or 16 ms. I checked with the Webkit blog and they indicated that XP often could not time events shorter than 16 ms.

I thought some of the tests weren’t running, but I can’t find any evidence that they’re actually failing.

By: matanlurey

matanlurey — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 18:50:04 +0000

Personally, at least, any noticeable speed difference between Opera 9.27, Safari 3, and Firefox 3 is negligible, at least in my tests. It would be interesting to see different aspects of Javascript programming: Traditional loops, variable creation/deletion, use of XMLHttpRequest, and DOM node creation, and their applicable speeds on the latest browsers.

By: spherop

spherop — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 04:05:25 +0000

There’s no question. I have not been doing tests, but the heavy js web-app I am developing right now is substantially faster and more responsive in Safari on winxp than either ff or ie. It’s not subtle.

By: uize

uize — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 15:21:57 +0000

I’ve been seeing some interesting results with performance test pages that I use to explore various alternative techniques when implementing features for The UIZE Framework and the Zazzle Web site. Consistently, the test pages are reporting substantially lower time durations in Safari for Windows than FF or IE. My jaw drops. I assume that there’s something wrong with my test harness logic. Or is there something amiss with Safari’s Date mechanism that is used to time the operations? Or perhaps Safari’s JS interpreter now really is *that* much faster than the rest.

Must do some more digging…