Comments on: JavaScript optimization Part 1: Adding DOM elements to document

By: mascon

mascon — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 14:56:44 +0000

array[idx++]=
еще делают так, array[array.length]=
проверенно, работает быстрее чем .push
а склеивание строк с помощью отератора += тормазит не только в JS…

By: Abadonna

Abadonna — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 14:58:11 +0000

Для IE7 метод innerHTML не прокатывает для вставки <option> в <select>. Обрезается первый открывающий тэг <option>, в результате ни один из элементов списка не отображается.

By: sunnybear

sunnybear — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 04:13:12 +0000

1	array.push

можно заменить на

1	array[idx++]=

(ага, читаем Lecompte) — будет еще быстрее :)

By: efreeti

efreeti — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 14:14:10 +0000

BTW rest of your articles are also only connected to HTML/DOM/CSS/JS combination and not JS itself. I think it’s incorrect to name your article this way. Aren’t there quite useful topics like optimization of lookups, state pattern for avoiding if statements, etc. that really concern JS coding practices?

By: efreeti

efreeti — Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:53:57 +0000

I don’t quite understand what it has to do with JavaScript optimization? The only JavaScript optimization I see here is using array for string concat. The rest you were talking about is optimization of interaction with DOM ( and to tell you honestly nothing very new). Still although this method is more descriptive than using DOM methods for creation of JS, it is still ugly. In the end HTML markup should never be bundled inside the JS code, it’s already a bad practice – visualization should be separate from the logic. According to current state of things and MVC HTML is a part of the view, which is why you should not mess its creation with control (JS). So such things as HTML template should be defined outside the script. There are different ways of implementing such templating mechanism, some frameworks support such options.
You can say that you don’t have time for that and you fine with this solution. In case of small script/hack you will be right. But in any case this is far from unobtrusive JavaScript or good practise in case of larger development.

By: melco

melco — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 07:46:01 +0000

[lang_ru]Ну на счет opera – самы быстрый браузер – я бы не согласился. Safari рулит, потестируй. Минимум в 2 раза быстрее всех.[/lang_ru]
[lang_en]Can’t agree about Opera is the fastest browser in the world. Try out Safary and see that it’s at least two times faster than other.[/lang_en]

By: DrGreen

DrGreen — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 08:37:50 +0000

Thanks for this article, it save my day!
Thanks again!

By: Sören

Sören — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 05:09:03 +0000

thanx for the article! interesting – i never thought of an array and “push” to do this. btw “push” is not compatible with ie5.0 if you care about that browser.
but one important thing – i think your ie6 install must be totally f***** up. i realy could not reproduce your measurements…
on my machine for ie6 (in test-order):
188, 125, (too long ;-), 94, 78
to get a comparison, ff1.5 takes 150ms for the first test here… so?!
to use innerHTML was also the recommendation of PPK (Peter Paul Koch), after his testings way back.
hm, there is clearly something wrong.

By: Erhan

Erhan — Tue, 22 May 2007 19:33:36 +0000

Great article. Thank you very much.

By: Скорость работы браузеров » Блог FX’а

Скорость работы браузеров » Блог FX’а — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:10:03 +0000

[…] После прочтения статьи Дмитрия Штефлюка про скорость работы javascript в разных браузерах я очень удивился – мой любимый Firefox оказался чуть ли не самым медленным браузером (после IE 6.0). Решил проверить самостоятельно на его тестовом примере и заодно сравнить скорость альфа-версии Firefox 3.0 с второй версией. А заодно установил Opera 9.20, которая вот вышла буквально вчера, чтобы удостовериться в ее быстроте. […]