- From: Joseph Kesselman/Watson/IBM <keshlam@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:57:19 -0400
- To: www-dom@w3.org
>BTW, using events as an extensibility mechanism also >implies that it needs to be FAST. If the event course of >extensibility is taken, there needs to be an investigation >on how performance of the event system can be improved. >I would not like to think that the DOM Events API >intrinsically imposes a poor performance event system >on all DOM Event implementations. Designing for generality usually does impose some costs.The DOM Event system may not be ideal for all applications which need event-like behavior. It shouldn't have to perform "poorly" (though actual performance is, as always, up to the individual implementation), but it may not perform as well as an event system which was precisely tailored and tuned to a specific application. In this case: If all you want is to call an additional behavior on a single node, the overhead of having to construct an object to carry its parameters, having to look up the function by name, and having to be prepared for the possibility that the event may be distributed to other listeners all contribute overhead that wouldn't exist in the simple subclassing case. It's roughly the same kind of overhead as calling a Java method via reflection... _plus_ having to search for capturing handlers, even if bubbling is turned off. ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research
Received on Thursday, 12 October 2000 09:58:04 UTC