Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Christoph M. Becker" Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript Subject: Re: Impact of implicit arrays... Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 11:55:23 +0200 Organization: solani.org Lines: 19 Message-ID: References: <4a1c28ea-447b-4e9b-9c75-68ef85c379e7@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: solani.org 1466589321 5263 eJwNysERACEIA8CWCASYlOOp9F+Ct+/NKNRuVhZzcnQ+cbfkZZh03rXGCEAbMtWfPE7cpptlPwlUD+Q= (22 Jun 2016 09:55:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.solani.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 09:55:21 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 X-User-ID: eJwFwQkRwEAIBDBLMGUXkMPx+JfQBB+V7UbQcLix7JIwThXk8sWF5ual0N37bajOgrrBUvwjlBEd In-Reply-To: Cancel-Lock: sha1:Hx+XJkm06gla8Viz2OBVbaJAEy8= X-NNTP-Posting-Host: eJwNx8ERwDAIA7CVSsD4GIdAvf8IrX6Cp+UwEhkQFCWPphX/7NG8UpsXnnUuOXH8gu1XwtF+JG4Row== Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:30709 On 22.06.2016 at 00:31, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > On 6/21/2016 3:28 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: >> On 6/21/2016 3:10 PM, Christoph M. Becker wrote: >> >>> Then you might be interested in typed arrays, see, for instance, >>> . > > Although, why should I use full blown dynamic arrays, when these types > arrays will work fine? Humm, they almost have to be more efficient in > this respect. I presume they're more efficient, but I've never used them so can't tell. Most likely there are multiple benchmarks available on the web, and of course, you could do your own. -- Christoph M. Becker