- From: Stefan Haustein <haustein@google.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 13:04:57 +0000
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 8:35 AM, Stef Epardaud <stef at epardaud.fr> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 07:25:34PM +0000, Stefan Haustein wrote: > > We've been getting pretty good traction on Vlad's ArrayBuffers > proposal, > > which was taken from the WebGL spec. Our current plan is to change > the > > names in the browsers (WebKit, Chrome and Mozilla) to the "non-WebGL > > specific" names Vlad proposes in his spec. We'd really like this to > be the > > "one true binary data access" mechanism for HTML. We're talking to > the > > File API guys about this and I think this API can be adapted in all > the > > other places as well. > > As far as performance goes, can you point me at some quantitative > data? > > When you say it's an "orders-of-magnitude" bottleneck, what are you > > comparing it to? The API is very new and we certainly want to > improve it > > for the various purposes it can be put to. We've even talked about > > optimizations inside the JS implementations to improve access > performance. > > If we can get something akin to Java's System.arraycopy ( > > http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/java/lang/System.html#arraycopy%28java.lang.Object,%20int,%20java.lang.Object,%20int,%20int%29 > ) then the ArrayBuffer proposal would work for me :) > > If we cannot copy ArrayBuffer ranges by blocks in an effecient manner, > then it's going to be very limiting. > The array based set method would let you do this: function arrayCopy(src, spos, dst, dpos, len) { dst.set(src.slice(spos, len), dpos); } If I understand Vladimir's response correctly, its omission from his ECAMScript proposal is unintentional (it is present in the WebGL spec) and will be fixed. Stefan > -- > St?phane Epardaud > -- Stefan Haustein Google UK Limited Registered Office: Belgrave House, 76 Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W 9TQ; Registered in England Number: 3977902 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100217/b6015e69/attachment.htm>
Received on Wednesday, 17 February 2010 05:04:57 UTC