From 67c5400d44311d903eb42bdabc39fdc78af3984f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Leo Horie Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 10:22:21 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] clarify wording --- archive/v0.1.13/benchmarks.html | 2 +- archive/v0.1.13/mithril.min.zip | Bin 43732 -> 43732 bytes docs/benchmarks.md | 2 +- 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/archive/v0.1.13/benchmarks.html b/archive/v0.1.13/benchmarks.html index 501aa2f0..c6bc8afb 100644 --- a/archive/v0.1.13/benchmarks.html +++ b/archive/v0.1.13/benchmarks.html @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@

Benchmarks

-

These benchmarks were designed to measure Javascript running time. This is significant because the gzipped size of a framework can be misleading in terms of how much code actually runs on page loads. In my experience, page loads happen far more commonly than one would expect in single page applications: power users open multiple tabs, and mobile users are open and close the browser very frequently. And as far as templating engines go, the initial page load represents the worst case for the rendering algorithm since there are very little room for performance optimization tricks. It's arguably also one of the most important metric when it comes to performance.

+

These benchmarks were designed to measure Javascript running time for Mithril in comparison with other popular Javascript MVC frameworks. Javascript running time is significant because the gzipped size of a framework can be misleading in terms of how much code actually runs on page loads. In my experience, page loads happen far more commonly than one would expect in single page applications: power users open multiple tabs, and mobile users are open and close the browser very frequently. And as far as templating engines go, the initial page load represents the worst case for the rendering algorithm since there are very little room for performance optimization tricks. It's arguably also one of the most important metric when it comes to performance.

The numbers shown here are best-run results for all frameworks, except for Mithril's case, for which I'm taking the worst-run result. The numbers aren't statistically rigorous (e.g. I didn't bother to calculate standard deviation), but they should be enough to give a rough idea of what is faster than what.

Generally speaking, these tests are making a deliberate effort to be biased in favor of other frameworks: for example, I don't load "optional-but-usually-used-in-real-life" things like the router module for Angular, or Marionette in Backbone's case, and I load the entirety of Mithril. In addition, this test deliberately avoids triggering requestAnimationFrame-based performance optimizations for Mithril, since this optimization does not exist in many frameworks and severely skews numbers in Mithril's favor in CPU-intensive situations like parallax sites. I'm also NOT using the Mithril template compiler, which would also skew the benchmark in Mithril's favor.

To run the execution time tests below, click on their respective links, run the profiler from your desired browser's developer tools and measure the running time of a page refresh (Lower is better).

diff --git a/archive/v0.1.13/mithril.min.zip b/archive/v0.1.13/mithril.min.zip index da05c65f4d56ccf5585ec38d29669c83ce8c175b..a146091d5d95c71c14e740ebccc512aa236891ba 100644 GIT binary patch delta 60 zcmca|mFdb=CY}IqW)?065ZDs5ktaiyX-m-NGSz3+AUZB_w+E1(EWOGKM1`*ciB6uf G$^igsauwYG delta 60 zcmca|mFdb=CY}IqW)?065UB9o$djSURN=e1O!b*Hh>lC#?E$1GORus5QQ@mVqLZhr GasU8DeiT;# diff --git a/docs/benchmarks.md b/docs/benchmarks.md index 19ede972..73952b41 100644 --- a/docs/benchmarks.md +++ b/docs/benchmarks.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ ## Benchmarks -These benchmarks were designed to measure Javascript running time. This is significant because the gzipped size of a framework can be misleading in terms of how much code actually runs on page loads. In my experience, page loads happen far more commonly than one would expect in single page applications: power users open multiple tabs, and mobile users are open and close the browser very frequently. And as far as templating engines go, the initial page load represents the worst case for the rendering algorithm since there are very little room for performance optimization tricks. It's arguably also [one of the most important metric when it comes to performance](http://blog.kissmetrics.com/loading-time/). +These benchmarks were designed to measure Javascript running time for Mithril in comparison with other popular Javascript MVC frameworks. Javascript running time is significant because the gzipped size of a framework can be misleading in terms of how much code actually runs on page loads. In my experience, page loads happen far more commonly than one would expect in single page applications: power users open multiple tabs, and mobile users are open and close the browser very frequently. And as far as templating engines go, the initial page load represents the worst case for the rendering algorithm since there are very little room for performance optimization tricks. It's arguably also [one of the most important metric when it comes to performance](http://blog.kissmetrics.com/loading-time/). The numbers shown here are best-run results for all frameworks, except for Mithril's case, for which I'm taking the worst-run result. The numbers aren't statistically rigorous (e.g. I didn't bother to calculate standard deviation), but they should be enough to give a rough idea of what is faster than what.