vitteaymeric at gmail.com
Tue Apr 2 15:03:48 PDT 2013
Le 02/04/2013 04:24, Kenneth Russell a écrit :
> Agreed. DataView's methods are all simple and should be easy to
> optimize. Because they include a conditional byte swap, they can't run
> quite as fast as the typed arrays' accessors -- but they shouldn't
> need to. DataView was designed to support file and network I/O, where
> throughput is limited by the disk or network connection. The typed
> array views were designed for in-memory assembly of data to be
> submitted to the graphics card, sound card, etc., and must run as fast
> as possible.
When you are streaming things, what's the correct use of DataViews?
ie : you are supposed to create each time you want to read some bytes a
DataView (which can be optimized or whatever, but still with some costs)?
Maybe it's outside of the scope of this discussion, I have already
provided examples, I still suspect that I am using it wrongly or that
ArrayBuffers are more adapted to webgl (ie static buffer manipulation)
than network streaming (ie dynamic buffer manipulation).
Probably I am wrong but really would like to know then what's the
Email : avitte at jcore.fr
iAnonym : http://www.ianonym.com
node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor
GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms
Web : www.jcore.fr
Webble : www.webble.it
Extract Widget Mobile : www.extractwidget.com
BlimpMe! : www.blimpme.com
More information about the es-discuss