Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #25736 > unrolled thread

converting Julia sets into animated CSS objects...

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  converting Julia sets into animated CSS objects... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2014-08-26 12:50 -0700
    Re: converting Julia sets into animated CSS objects... "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-08-27 15:15 -0700
      Re: converting Julia sets into animated CSS objects... "Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> - 2014-09-26 21:28 -0700
        Re: converting Julia sets into animated CSS objects... "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-09-28 03:38 -0700

#25736 — converting Julia sets into animated CSS objects...

First of all, here is a little example that kind of shows
off the concept I have in mind:

http://webpages.charter.net/appcore/ctfractal.html


I am going to derive the CSS layout and orbit patterns
from an IFS. This thing can even go to 3d transform/
translation land.

Can I use JavaScript to automatically create HTML5
source and run it.

AFAICT, this would be better suited for the generator
to be based in PHP, and the final product could be
JavaScript and/or HTML5 CSS3.

Any thoughts?

;^o

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#25746

On Tuesday, August 26, 2014 2:50:40 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> First of all, here is a little example that kind of shows
> off the concept I have in mind:
> 
> http://webpages.charter.net/appcore/ctfractal.html
> 
> I am going to derive the CSS layout and orbit patterns
> from an IFS. This thing can even go to 3d transform/
> translation land.
> 
> Can I use JavaScript to automatically create HTML5
> source and run it.
> 
> AFAICT, this would be better suited for the generator
> to be based in PHP, and the final product could be
> JavaScript and/or HTML5 CSS3.
> 
> Any thoughts?

I've found the efficiency of CSS animations to fail terribly at scale. I would suggest manipulating canvas image data directly is still the best way to go.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25868

> "Michael Haufe (TNO)"  wrote in message 
> news:18dac6ec-c050-4ebd-b996-3a980aeb1307@googlegroups.com...

> > On Tuesday, August 26, 2014 2:50:40 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> > First of all, here is a little example that kind of shows
> > off the concept I have in mind:
> >
> > http://webpages.charter.net/appcore/ctfractal.html
[...]
> > Can I use JavaScript to automatically create HTML5
> > source and run it.
[...]
> > Any thoughts?

> I've found the efficiency of CSS animations to fail
> terribly at scale. I would suggest manipulating
> canvas image data directly is still the best way to go.

Damn. BTW, how does the example animation
run for you?

http://webpages.charter.net/appcore/ctfractal.html

Is is kind of smooth, or jittery as all heck?

FWIW, its smoother for me on Chrome than Firefox!

;^(... 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#25869

On Friday, September 26, 2014 11:36:29 PM UTC-5, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:

> Is is kind of smooth, or jittery as all heck?

Chrome: ok, Fx: jittery

> FWIW, its smoother for me on Chrome than Firefox!

While Fx debateably "wins" currently in terms of memory consumption and JavaScript performance, this particular aspect still falls short. I glanced through bugzilla, and it looks like part of the issue is that CSS animations are not on a separate thread yet. I wouldn't be surprised if this was fixed by the end of the year. 

I still vote for doing this in canvas+JS so you can control the efficiency better,

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web