Aymeric Vitte vitteaymeric at gmail.com
Wed Apr 3 01:42:20 PDT 2013

So, my suspicion was correct, I am using DataView methods like this 
here and on other projects) for historical reasons, because I started 
from node.js's buffers methods and then switched to ArrayBuffers with 
node.js's like methods, because in some cases I needed to use both at 
the same time or to be able to switch easily from one to another.

Then the use is not correct in theory, now performances seem to be OK 
(except node.js), so maybe most of the implementations are instantiating 
once a DataView for a given ArrayBuffer and keeping reference to it when 
you call it again?


Le 03/04/2013 00:52, Kenneth Russell a écrit :
> Yes: API consistency. An ArrayBuffer is opaque; to work with the data
> it contains, instantiate a view.
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Kevin Gadd <kevin.gadd at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Is there a reason why DataView wasn't specified as static methods that take
>> an ArrayBuffer in the first place? That would solve the problem of figuring
>> out when/how often to create DataView instances, and eliminate the garbage
>> created by using DataViews.
>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Kenneth Russell <kbr at google.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Aymeric Vitte <vitteaymeric at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 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
>>>> correct
>>>> use.
>>> If I understand your question, then the correct use of DataView is:
>>> upon receiving an ArrayBuffer, create a DataView referring to it. When
>>> iterating down the contents of the ArrayBuffer, continue to use the
>>> same DataView instance, just incrementing the offset. In
>>> abstract-tls/lib/abstract-tls.js there are some operations which
>>> create a new DataView just to read or write a single element; this
>>> isn't the correct usage.
>>> http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/webgl/typed_arrays/ may be a
>>> useful reference.
>>> If you're handling streaming data then presumably you're receiving
>>> multiple ArrayBuffers, one after the other. You should create one
>>> DataView per buffer. The only challenge is properly handling the
>>> boundary from one buffer to the next, if the boundary is within an
>>> element like a uint16 or uint32.
>>> -Ken
>> --
>> -kg

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 mailing list