3 ms·
Ah, is that why http://famo.us http://famo.us just looks like a blurry pile of laundry to me? But most importantly: didn't Intel release around this time last
by diydsp 13y ago
Ah, is that why http://famo.us http://famo.us just looks like a blurry pile of laundry to me?
But most importantly: didn't Intel release around this time last year JIT compilation of Javascript to run on their HID (GPU onboard CPU)? (wouldn't that make slow-execute javascript a non-issue?)
- X4 13y agoOh snap, thanks for reminding me of this. It's called ParallelJS. Here's a link to a demo video: http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/research/intel-labs-river-trail-demo-video.html http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/research/intel-labs-r... :) I like the accent I'd recommend checking the Ajaxian article[1] that sums it up. You can find the source on Github [2]. You can play around with the River Trail interactive shell [3] too. -- [1] http://ajaxian.com/archives/intels-parallel-extensions-for-javascript http://ajaxian.com/archives/intels-parallel-extensions-for-j... [2] https://github.com/RiverTrail/RiverTrail https://github.com/RiverTrail/RiverTrail [3] https://github.com/RiverTrail/interactive https://github.com/RiverTrail/interactive
- Cthulhu_ 13y agoWell it would if Javascript execution speed was the issue, but as the article highlights, they're using Javascript to replace slow browser rendering, and the argument is that JS is, in the case of matrix transformations, 80% the speed of native C, and using that to replace the renderer for animations in a browser is faster than the native render. Of course, faster JS is never wrong.