I took a look at his Javascript code, in the "HTML" example, and it was far from as well written as it could be - I could easily do the same effect with a whole lot better framerate. I am not sure how fair a test this is.
I think the general rant I'd throw comes down to the fact that this guy is a "software engineer". He constructs code as if he was designing a mechanical machine, which is just awkward and inefficient. Don't get me wrong on the whole "software engineering vs programming" thing, but I discern good, fast, efficient code from bulky, clunky (but still working) code; you can't "drive car" with a sailing yacht, you can't "breakdance" the Waltz, and you can't go "industrial engineer" on programming - sure, it'll get you somewhere, but it's just not the best way for the end purpose's fullest efficiency - AND EFFICIENCY MATTERS.
1000 plots, averages to 35 fps on my 2.25ghz Macbook on Safari 4.0.3, and this requires more computational power per object plotted than a smart version of the "bouncing balls" effect he tries to do.
Comments
I took a look at his Javascript code, in the "HTML" example, and it was far from as well written as it could be - I could easily do the same effect with a whole lot better framerate. I am not sure how fair a test this is.
Would you like to go into specifics and teach us something?
I think the general rant I'd throw comes down to the fact that this guy is a "software engineer". He constructs code as if he was designing a mechanical machine, which is just awkward and inefficient. Don't get me wrong on the whole "software engineering vs programming" thing, but I discern good, fast, efficient code from bulky, clunky (but still working) code; you can't "drive car" with a sailing yacht, you can't "breakdance" the Waltz, and you can't go "industrial engineer" on programming - sure, it'll get you somewhere, but it's just not the best way for the end purpose's fullest efficiency - AND EFFICIENCY MATTERS.
Play with this a bit: http://pastebin.com/wauSARbt
1000 plots, averages to 35 fps on my 2.25ghz Macbook on Safari 4.0.3, and this requires more computational power per object plotted than a smart version of the "bouncing balls" effect he tries to do.
I suppose the same could be said about the Flash code.