Not a benchmark, but my 8-bit emulator let's you compare asm.js and wasm performance between browsers and platforms somewhat, and (if compiled natively) also for native x64 or ARM performance:
It's implemented in a C-with-classes style C++ though, not Rust.
When you press the 'UI' button, there's a little millisecond timer in the top-right corner which tells you how much time is spent in the 'emulator frame', which is pure asm.js/wasm code which doesn't call out into JS APIs.
You can switch between the asm.js and wasm version through the hamburger-menu-icon at the top-left corner.
I'm seeing the "1.2..1.5x slower than native" performance there.
Some of my other demos are also fairly CPU heavy, for instance the two Bullet-Physics demos here:
These demos have asm.js, wasm and pnacl versions and also have fairly detailed timing information which makes it possible to compare performance to the natively compiled versions.
I do currently see some mysterious performance differences between Mac and Windows though, not sure what's up with that (e.g. my mid-2014 MBP with a 2.8 GHz i5 is giving better performance than the 3.5 GHz i7-4770K in my work PC).
> I do currently see some mysterious performance differences between Mac and Windows though, not sure what's up with that (e.g. my mid-2014 MBP with a 2.8 GHz i5 is giving better performance than the 3.5 GHz i7-4770K in my work PC).
It's worth checking the single thread performance of both your CPU models (see www.cpubenchmark.net), sometimes the higher end models actually have slower single thread performance.
Could you pastebin me your JSON (cory@launchboxhq.com)? 2k of simple (`{"1": 1, "2": 2, ...}`) lines seems to work fine (slight delay) for us. Maybe your JSON is super complicated.
We can work on improving performance if we have 1k+ lines of super complicated JSON to mess with. :)
I personally tried it with http://www.json-generator.com/ ( I just changed the initial repeat to 50,70) - did not break, but a big lag after pasting for a few seconds
The difference between Jeet and Foundation's grid are two things.
1. Jeet uses actual columns whereas with Foundation you need to nest elements within elements: http://imgur.com/a/OWyOQ
2. @include grid-column(4) isn't as "on-the-fly flexible" as Jeet since you have to define the base number of columns in Foundation whereas in Jeet you could just say @include column(4/12) or column (1/3) or column(33.333333/100), etc. - being able to say in natural language what you want your container to do is pretty powerful stuff.
Theorizing, but I suspect FB will begin targeting and picking off IP of apps built entirely on React stacks in a few years.
Please don't go back to them. Just contribute to Vue's ecosystem like crazy. Worst case scenario it'll keep FB in check.