I have a HTML list of about 500 items and a "filter" box above it. I started by using jQuery to filter the list when I typed a letter (timing code added later): $('#filter').keyup( function() { var jqStart = (new Date).getTime(); var search = $(this).val().toLowerCase(); var $list = $('ul.ablist > li'); $list.each( function() { if ( $(this).text().toLowerCase().indexOf(search) === -1 ) $(this).hide(); else $(this).show(); } ); console.log('Time: ' + ((new Date).getTime() - jqStart)); } ); However, there was a couple of seconds delay after typing each letter (particularly the first letter). So I thought it may be slightly quicker if I used plain Javascript (I read recently that jQuery's each function is particularly slow). Here's my JS equivalent: document.getElementById('filter').addEventListener( 'keyup', function () { var jsStart = (new Date).getTime()...
It's using HTML5's new history.pushState() feature to allow the page to masquerade as being at a different URL to that from which it was originally fetched.
ReplyDeleteThis seems only to be supported by WebKit at the moment, which is why the rest of us are seeing ?v=wall#!/facebook?v=info instead of ?v=info.
The feature allows dynamically-loaded pages to be properly bookmarked, exchanged etc between JS-supporting and non-JS-supporting user agents. Because if you as a JS user linked someone to ?v=wall#!/facebook?v=info and their browser didn't support JS and XMLHttpRequest, the page wouldn't work for them. The #! is also used as a tip to search engines to download the non-AJAX version.
For MooTools developers I recommend checking out cpojer's mootools-history plugin which provides support for the native history API when available, with a fallback to hashes.
ReplyDeleteI don't have Facebook so I can't check. But I'm 95% sure that it has to be a full page request, the location bar is unwritable because this would be a very useful feature to absure for phishing websites (instead of http://fakeonlinebank.com it rewrite to http://yourtrustybank). It's probably just so fast that your browser appears to only load that part?
ReplyDeleteBut I'm curious to see if someone will correct me on this, because that would mean they have the answer you do want to hear ;)