Which jsPerf-test should I consider as standard for checking the performance of javascript template-engines
Posted
by
bhargav
on Stack Overflow
See other posts from Stack Overflow
or by bhargav
Published on 2012-06-20T06:24:39Z
Indexed on
2012/06/20
9:16 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 270
JavaScript
|template-engine
I am on a search for a javascript template engine that has good performance when used in large js applications and is also very suitable for mobile applications. So I have gone through the various jsPerf-tests for these. There seems to be a lot which show different results and it is confusing to find out which is the standard test.
Can some one guide me a standard jsPerf that I can refer to and that should also include following templates dust, underscore, hogan, mustache, handlebars.
From what I have observed dot.js is a constant performer with good rendering speed, but is it mature enough for larger applications ?
What is this "with" and "no with" that is shown in the jspref tests? Can some one explain.
In all the tests I have seen popular templates like mustache, handlebars, dust, hogan,etc seems to be behind performance than other templates, so why people are using them leaving out the top performers,is it because of maturity of these template engines?
Thanks in advance
© Stack Overflow or respective owner