3 ms·

The newer browsers (Chrome, Firefox 3.5 and such) use JIT JavaScript VMs. For that reason, I think it's not worth investing the effort of avoiding jQuery and g

The newer browsers (Chrome, Firefox 3.5 and such) use JIT JavaScript VMs. For that reason, I think it's not worth investing the effort of avoiding jQuery and going through all this effort for performance gains. It is highly likely that the browsers will optimize these kinds of things at compile time, and these kinds of problems will go away much like contemporary compilers reduced the need to make every string a constant and such (they are made into constants at compile time for you). There's plenty of other performance things to think about, though, but it doesn't seem to be worth it to me to chase this one.

richcollins 17y ago
It is if you care about the 70% of people online that use IE. I doubt IEs DOM will be speeding up any time soon.
bsaunder 17y ago
You're probably right now. I started down this road in 2006 when the JavaScript VMs weren't there yet with performance. At the time, it was a night and day difference (from don't blink to good-golly-what-are-you-doing). Also, I tend to like the declarative style of templates vs. the imperative style of code for my presentation layer.