On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:34 PM, Daniel Wasilewski <devudes...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I don't know why but it looks like it iss adding extra stars: > > http://fwienber.github.**com/**as-js-runtime-prototype/<http:** > //fwienber.github.com/as-js-**runtime-prototype/<http://fwienber.github.com/as-js-runtime-prototype/> > > I obviously realised that, and was able to see your sources, Sorry again for the garbled link. Using gmail... > but it didn't change my mind about impact on performance using RequiredJS. > It is putting you down to JQuery level pretty much. > See above, I disagree. JQuery introduces considerable runtime overhead, even while the application is running. Again, I propose to use RequireJS for class linking only, so for a normal application, all define()/require() callbacks are done during application start-up and then never again. We would have to create a performance comparison that takes into account that a class is only loaded once (involving a require() callback), but instantiated many times without that overhead, and also that an application does usually not consist of ten-thousands of classes (while ten-thousands of objects are not unlikely at all). The complex enterprise RIA we develop runs with a bit over 3000 classes. Even if using AMD would increase start-up time by some linear factor, do you really think start-up time / performance is so crucial that you would sacrifice a clean dependency management that helps avoiding global namespace pollution and allows even for circular static dependencies? -Frank- > > Dan > > > > > On 12/20/2012 10:27 PM, Frank Wienberg wrote: > >> Oops? Can you give me a pointer which link does not work? I can't >> reproduce. >> Maybe the new subdomain created by GitHub pages (fwienber.github.com) is >> not "spread around the world" yet? >> >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Daniel Wasilewski <devudes...@gmail.com >> >wrote: >> >> Btw, yes I have checked your links, but stuff on github is 404. >>> >> >
