2009/10/14 James :
>
> Unless your DOM tree is huge and you're trying to select something
> massive in one go, the performance difference between a simple jQuery
> ID selector (e.g. $("#myID")) vs. a native getElementById selector
> should be very negligible, because jQuery uses that same native
>
On Oct 15, 8:42 am, JenniferWalters wrote:
> I do agree on smaller DOM trees, a user really is not able to tell the
> difference and jQuery is so much easier to code.
What Michael and James are trying to tell you is that the jQuery
selector for ID (eg. $('#myID')) actually uses document.getEleme
Unfortunately the site is internal and I am not able to let you guys
get to it.
And what you said is correct. Some of the web pages are huge. One
has
eight tab pages with quite a bit of DOM in them. Another can have a
couple
of hundred elements that need to be displayed\hidden depending on user
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 3:48 PM, James wrote:
> Unless your DOM tree is huge and you're trying to select something
> massive in one go, the performance difference between a simple jQuery
> ID selector (e.g. $("#myID")) vs. a native getElementById selector
> should be very negligible, because jQue
Unless your DOM tree is huge and you're trying to select something
massive in one go, the performance difference between a simple jQuery
ID selector (e.g. $("#myID")) vs. a native getElementById selector
should be very negligible, because jQuery uses that same native
selector.
You should demonstr
I don't have a specific code snippet that is a problem. I just
started using jQuery instead of DOM because everyone speaks of it. I
do qutie a bit of Setup stuff at the start of web pages, and I have
noticed a tremendous difference in the time a user can begin actually
working in the web page wh
On Oct 14, 3:33 pm, JenniferWalters wrote:
> Are jQuery searches slow versus using DOM? (i.e.
> document.getElementById("whatever") )
Of course. jQuery adds many function calls and layers of abstraction
when you do $('#whatever') vs. document.getElementById('whatever').
> It seems that it takes
7 matches
Mail list logo
