|
MandelBLOT by Lungcancer Entertainment [web]
[nfo]
|
||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||
|
popularity : 55% |
|||||||
alltime top: #15583 |
|
|||||||
added on the 2012-04-15 12:14:11 by -SP-  |
||||||||
popularity helper
comments
Trippy :)
cool!
slow
Big & slow
Quote:
Really ?setTimeout("q("+(n+.1)+")")
(=
Cool but very slow..
ok
MandelWater
p01: well it does work, doesnt it :D
quite cool for the size
gargaj: hence the piggy
very nice wavey fractal. and works fast enough with chrome here.
@p01: c'mon pal, effect looks good after all. i don't think -SP- would claim he's the best JS optimizer in the world. you don't need to be hard on the others just because you are too good at sth. ;)
@p01: c'mon pal, effect looks good after all. i don't think -SP- would claim he's the best JS optimizer in the world. you don't need to be hard on the others just because you are too good at sth. ;)
"Smooth" on my 3.4Ghz desktop computer and sluggish on my EEE.
The effect is cool yes! But there's been Mandelbrot and Julia fractals in JS in 256b ( and 128b ) for ages. For this very kind of "effect", JS is pretty close to MSDOS ASM now. Such wavy mandelbrot would be ok/meh at 512b, ok/rulez in 256b, massive rulez at 128b or less.
The effect is cool yes! But there's been Mandelbrot and Julia fractals in JS in 256b ( and 128b ) for ages. For this very kind of "effect", JS is pretty close to MSDOS ASM now. Such wavy mandelbrot would be ok/meh at 512b, ok/rulez in 256b, massive rulez at 128b or less.
well, there's always space for improvement innit? :)
it's pretty slow over here too, but I have a crappy machine and had no change to test it on better hw, so I hoped at least a few people would have a smooth result.
I respect what p01 says, since he's right about the performance rant, so don't worry, he's not being that hard and I am not easily offended anyway.
Tips on speed optimization are highly appreciated though :P
it's pretty slow over here too, but I have a crappy machine and had no change to test it on better hw, so I hoped at least a few people would have a smooth result.
I respect what p01 says, since he's right about the performance rant, so don't worry, he's not being that hard and I am not easily offended anyway.
Tips on speed optimization are highly appreciated though :P
^ had no *chance
Oh yes! There is ALWAYS room for improvements. Esp. when you think you saw the end of it.
The most simple and efficient speed optimization here would be to use a single ImageData ( no need to re-create one for each frame )
The most simple and efficient speed optimization here would be to use a single ImageData ( no need to re-create one for each frame )
nice one
Cool.
submit changes
if this prod is a fake, some info is false or the download link is broken,
do not post about it in the comments, it will get lost.
instead, click here !
Online version here