Hey guys, This thread inspired me to write a blog article
http://www.learningjquery.com/2009/03/43439-reasons-to-use-append-correctly I did some testing of the += and array.join methods of long string concatenation. Interesting stuff! It turns out that += and array.join are browser dependent in their execution time, although one method is quicker in a majority of current and next gen browsers. On Feb 8, 11:20 am, Kevin Dalman <kevin.dal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Rick, based on what I've learned from testing, you have another option > now... > > Here is a modified version of Mike's code - without generating the > table. > > function populateDutyTable(response) { > > var currentDay = ''; > var rows = response.QGETDUTYSCHEDULE.DATA; > var out = [], o = -1; > > out[++o] = '<tbody>'; // CHANGED > > for( var row, i = -1; row = rows[++i]; ) { > > var day = row[1]; > if( currentDay != day ) { > currentDay = day; > out[++o] = '<tr><td class="cell-day">'; > out[++o] = row[1]; > out[++o] = '</td><td class="cell-date">'; > out[++o] = row[2]; > out[++o] = '</td><td class="cell-blank" > colspan="5"> </td></tr>'; > } > > out[++o] = '<tr><td class="cell-blank-day"> </td><td > class="cell-blank-date"> </td><td class="cell-am-am">'; > out[++o] = row[3]; > out[++o] = '</td><td class="cell-position">'; > out[++o] = row[4]; > out[++o] = '</td><td colspan="3">Cell Content</td></tr>'; > } > > out[++o] = '</tbody>'; // CHANGED > > $('#scheduleBody').append( out.join('') ); // CHANGED > } > > A container around the table is no longer required because wrapping > the rows in a tbody achieves the same performance as wrapping them in > a table. Plus, you could now add rows without regenerating the entire > table. This provides more options with no penalty. For example, now > you could hard-code the table with column headers - for example... > > <table id="scheduleBody"> > <thead> > <tr> > <th>ID</th> > <th>Day</th> > <th>Date</th> > <th>Name</th> > </tr> > </thead> > </table> > > This is cleaner and faster than adding column headers inside your > Javascript loop. > > I suggest you try both methods, Rick. Use a timer (like MIike's sample > pages) to confirm whether both are equally fast. Based on my tests, > you may find appending to the table even faster, with cleaner markup > as a bonus. > > Ciao, > > /Kevin > > On Feb 7, 3:20 pm, "Rick Faircloth" <r...@whitestonemedia.com> wrote: > > > Hey, thanks Michael for taking the time to provide the > > explanation and the re-write. I'll put this into place > > and see how it performs. I'm sure it'll be *much* better! > > > Rick
