More art!
by Naneau
Well… Okay, its not more, it’s just better. I updated it. Which is what I do. I wrote the original script when I couldn’t sleep a few nights ago. Coding in a sleep-deprived state always gives me interesting results, although they may not always be that useful 
.
Today I took some time and had another look at the script. Because I sometimes think there should be some kind of meaning behind things I do, I made the number of divs the JavaScript uses to (re-)draw a picture variable. This means I can now check what the limit of it is, and guess what the bottleneck might be.
It appears that 10,000 divs is a bit too much for my system. It freezes up Firefox quite nicely. As pretty much all the work is now done by JavaScript, it does seems that 10.000 DOM elements is a bit too much for it to handle. Interesting!
Comments
Wow, I’m impressed. I should try sleep-deprived coding. I just had to try the 10,000 div option and it brought Firefox to its knees on my system (P4, 1.5 gig), but it came back to the light after a couple minutes. Now we just have to figure out a useful application for your new technique. And a catchy name too. In the world of Web 2.0, you can’t underestimate the power of a catchy name.
Yes, as of yet I haven’t found anyone who could withstand the blast of 10.000 floated divs
We’ll see. I did think of some uses for it though. Initially, the idea came when I was doing: http://naneau.nl/2007/05/12/javascript-htmlcss-charts/
There may be something I can visualize with this approach…
That’s something worth being called “web 2.0″ application. Seems like my system (Pentium D 3.2->3.4) could withstand attack of 10′000 divs. It took about 30-45secs for my Firefox to render the page. And each time I hovered over the image and javascript got fired off it took another 30 secs to re-render the page.
P.S.
You have a small typo in your blog. Near e-mail input: “E-mail required)” is lacking “(“.