Firefox 4's JägerMonkey JIT status

Re:Firefox 4's JägerMonkey JIT status by bokbar on Wednesday July 14, 2010 @12:53AM (#1513630)

Wow, what do you do with your browser that you absolutely need to have a JS performance which is an order of magnitude better than FF 3.6? Just curious...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Firefox 4's JägerMonkey JIT status by tsuraan on Wednesday July 14, 2010 @10:03AM (#1514564)

High performance isn't just about getting stuff done faster, it can also be thought of as getting the same amount done in less CPU time. When I'm running on batteries, my laptop's CPUs are running at 800MHz, and I get about 8-10 hours of battery life. If something's making my computer work, my CPUs go up to 2.4GHz, and my battery life plummets. More efficient javascript engines should be able to do the same work with less battery use, which makes me happy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Firefox 4's JägerMonkey JIT status by GeneralMaximus on Wednesday July 14, 2010 @07:35AM (#1514262)

  1. Facebook
  2. Google Wave
  3. Google Docs
  4. And a bunch of other webapps I'm forgetting ...

Try out Wave on an older version of Firefox (say, 3.0 or even something from the 2.x branch if you're adventurous). It totally destroys the browser.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Firefox 4's JägerMonkey JIT status by Perceval on Wednesday July 14, 2010 @11:23AM (#1514838)

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&s...

"Well, let's say you can shave 10 seconds off of the boot time. Multiply that by five million users and thats 50 million seconds, every single day. Over a year, that's probably dozens of lifetimes. So if you make it boot ten seconds faster, you've saved a dozen lives. That's really worth it, don't you think?"

Those few seconds add up.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Firefox 4's JägerMonkey JIT status by lispygem on Wednesday July 14, 2010 @12:56AM (#1513638)

What's up with downvoting? It's a great question, I'm intrigued by adbge performance requirements as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]