<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Optimizing for loop in javascript</title>
	<atom:link href="http://devblog.solidcactus.com/2008/10/optimizing-for-loop-in-javascript/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://devblog.solidcactus.com/2008/10/optimizing-for-loop-in-javascript/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:46:29 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: anonymous</title>
		<link>http://devblog.solidcactus.com/2008/10/optimizing-for-loop-in-javascript/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://devblog.solidcactus.com/?p=26#comment-4</guid>
		<description>Also you fail to mention that reversing loops to use -- instead of ++ can double the speed.

See:
http://archive.devwebpro.com/devwebpro-39-20030514OptimizingJavaScriptforExecutionSpeed.html

Listing 10.10</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also you fail to mention that reversing loops to use &#8212; instead of ++ can double the speed.</p>
<p>See:<br />
<a href="http://archive.devwebpro.com/devwebpro-39-20030514OptimizingJavaScriptforExecutionSpeed.html" rel="nofollow">http://archive.devwebpro.com/devwebpro-39-20030514OptimizingJavaScriptforExecutionSpeed.html</a></p>
<p>Listing 10.10</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anonymous</title>
		<link>http://devblog.solidcactus.com/2008/10/optimizing-for-loop-in-javascript/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:38:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://devblog.solidcactus.com/?p=26#comment-3</guid>
		<description>You don't say why it's more optimized and that is much harder to skim.  Unless it is significantly faster which you haven't demonstrated, the amount of time it would take someone to understand and debug it at a simple glance is too much.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You don&#8217;t say why it&#8217;s more optimized and that is much harder to skim.  Unless it is significantly faster which you haven&#8217;t demonstrated, the amount of time it would take someone to understand and debug it at a simple glance is too much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
