Summary: Arrays are a lot smaller than objects, but only slightly faster on newer browsers. I’m writing an in-memory Javascript app that handles several thousand rows. Each row could be stored either as an array [1,2,3] or an object {"x":1,"y":2,"z":3}. Having read up on the performance of arrays vs objects, I thought I’d do a few tests on storing numbers from 0 to 1 million. The results for Chrome are below. (Firefox 7 was similar.) ...
Google Calendar is out. But for some reason, it’s too slow for me. Comments Dhar 13 Apr 2006 8:08 am: You are right. It was too frigging slow in the beginning. But after the initial wait, things worked out. :)) Krishna 15 Apr 2006 5:48 pm: Do you still see it being slow? S Anand 16 Apr 2006 6:45 am: It loads slowly, but is OK now. I’m having problems importing data in the iCal format, though.
As Jeremy put it, GMail is really damn fast. Faster than desktop email. I prefer it to Outlook, and hence to my work e-mail ID.
The world’s 100m record is broken. Without drugs, this time. At 9.78 seconds, Montgomery has been running at over 35 km per hour. I used to drive that fast, on average.
PC Pit Stop. A good tune-up for your PC. I managed to improve my hard disk performance by enabling DMA, and my memory by reducing the video card shared memory.
Even states have performance based pay. The less their fiscal deficit, the more their plan allocation. Good.
There’s a stall that sells theatre tickets for half price at Leicester Square, so I went there in the morning. It opened only at 12 noon, so rather than waiting, I just bought tickets for the balcony. 15.50 pounds didn’t seem to much. The musical was “The Phantom of the Opera”, running at Her Majesty’s Theatre. There were 6 of us, and we went to the show. That was when I realized why the tickets were so cheap. They were on the second row of the third floor. Which meant that we had to crane our necks to see anything. What made it worse was that the lady in front of me refused to sit still. But after a while, I got used to it. ...