- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 16:06:50 -0700
- To: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>
- Cc: Steve Orvell <sorvell@google.com>, Olli Pettay <olli@pettay.fi>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, WebApps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>, Erik Bryn <erik@erikbryn.com>, Dimitri Glazkov <dglazkov@google.com>
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com> wrote: >> On Apr 27, 2015, at 3:15 PM, Steve Orvell <sorvell@google.com> wrote: >> IMO, the appeal of this proposal is that it's a small change to the current spec and avoids changing user expectations about the state of the dom and can explain the two declarative proposals for distribution. >> >>> It seems like with this API, we’d have to make O(n^k) calls where n is the number of distribution candidates and k is the number of insertion points, and that’s bad. Or am I misunderstanding your design? >> >> I think you've understood the proposed design. As you noted, the cost is actually O(n*k). In our use cases, k is generally very small. > > I don't think we want to introduce O(nk) algorithm. Pretty much every browser optimization we implement these days are removing O(n^2) algorithms in the favor of O(n) algorithms. Hard-baking O(nk) behavior is bad because we can't even theoretically optimize it away. You're aware, obviously, that O(n^2) is a far different beast than O(nk). If k is generally small, which it is, O(nk) is basically just O(n) with a constant factor applied. ~TJ
Received on Monday, 27 April 2015 23:07:38 UTC