Yeah, he does, it's distracting. Could you, like, put a check box at the front of the page to make him diseapear, or at least stop !#$* running ? Thanks.
Joined: 2/28/2006
Posts: 2275
Location: Milky Way -> Earth -> Brazil
I think Bisqwit is not obeying the rules and should be banned.
"Genuine self-esteem, however, consists not of causeless feelings, but of certain knowledge about yourself.
It rests on the conviction that you — by your choices, effort and actions — have made yourself into the
kind of person able to deal with reality. It is the conviction — based on the evidence of your own volitional
functioning — that you are fundamentally able to succeed in life and, therefore, are deserving of that success."
- Onkar Ghate
Bisqwit wrote:
On my old G4 Mac that I use for seeding the videos, the animation causes the CPU usage to go to 100%. Turning off Javascript solves the problem, though I dislike having to do that. One solution would be to slow the animation down slightly by using a short Sleep command. I like the animation, and I agree with Twelvepack that it gives the site personality.
On my old G4 Mac that I use for seeding the videos, the animation causes the CPU usage to go to 100%.
On X11 based Firefox clients, the animation indeed causes horrible CPU usage.
Therefore I have disabled it for X11 based Firefox clients, identified by the string "X11;" in the HTTP user agent. If "G4 Mac" has this same mishap, maybe I should disable it for that one too.
However, I do not know how to identify G4 browsers.
I have disabled it for X11 based Firefox clients, identified by the string "X11;" in the HTTP user agent. If "G4 Mac" has this same mishap, maybe I should disable it for that one too.
However, I do not know how to identify G4 browsers.
Hmm, I am using Firefox 2.0.0.20 on the G4, which I guess would be X11, so therefore the animation is supposed to be disabled. I also tried the site with Safari, and it works okay; it only increases the CPU usage by a small amount. So the problem is not with the G4.
On my old G4 Mac that I use for seeding the videos, the animation causes the CPU usage to go to 100%.
On X11 based Firefox clients, the animation indeed causes horrible CPU usage.
Therefore I have disabled it for X11 based Firefox clients, identified by the string "X11;" in the HTTP user agent. If "G4 Mac" has this same mishap, maybe I should disable it for that one too.
However, I do not know how to identify G4 browsers.
How odd, I'm using firefox, and Mario shows up for me on the workbench. It doesn't however om nom nom my CPU time.
My Useragent is: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.0.5) Gecko/2008121623 Ubuntu/8.10 (intrepid) Firefox/3.0.5
Build a man a fire, warm him for a day,
Set a man on fire, warm him for the rest of his life.
If you really want that javascript animation to be there, couldn't it be made lighter? Does javascript support some sleep() function or something, to make the animation advance less often?
Btw, to those who don't want to turn off javascripts completely, if you are using firefox I recommend installing the NoScript addon. It allows enabling and disabling javascripts on a per-site basis (and can really improve the security of the browser).
If you really want that javascript animation to be there, couldn't it be made lighter? Does javascript support some sleep() function or something, to make the animation advance less often?
Mario in slow motion? No thanks.
The problem, I guess, is that X11-Firefox does something stupid akin to recalculating the entire screen when a single div inside it is changed.
Mario has not been restricted. Only Luigi, who appears on the front page, has.
Proof that Bisquit hates Luigi. :-D Just kidding.
Bisqwit wrote:
Warp wrote:
If you really want that javascript animation to be there, couldn't it be made lighter? Does javascript support some sleep() function or something, to make the animation advance less often?
Mario in slow motion? No thanks.
As I had mentioned before, a very short sleep could solve this, and it would not be that noticeable. In the C programs that I have written that draw on the screen and run in a constant loop, there is a big difference in the CPU usage between having no sleep and a one millisecond sleep.
As I had mentioned before, a very short sleep could solve this, and it would not be that noticeable. In the C programs that I have written that draw on the screen and run in a constant loop, there is a big difference in the CPU usage between having no sleep and a one millisecond sleep.
There is a very short sleep.
Mario and Luigi are both animated at 35 ms intervals (about 28 fps), except when sleeping (off-screen), when it is 0.2 s intervals (about 5 fps).
It works by calling setTimeOut to schedule the next event of the animator at the end of the each event.
There is a very short sleep.
Mario and Luigi are both animated at 35 ms intervals (about 28 fps), except when sleeping (off-screen), when it is 0.2 s intervals (about 5 fps).
It works by calling setTimeOut to schedule the next event of the animator at the end of the each event.
Ah, so that wouldn't be the problem. I believe my computer has 100% CPU usage even when Mario or Luigi are off screen. I will verify that when I get home.
My only problem with the Luigi is that when I try to click on a link, sometimes he "blocks" my click by running past the cursor, and I have to click again to follow the link after he runs off. Actually I thought it was neat and I wonder if it means he actually does some secret thing in response to being clicked on, but it's probably not the best thing for the site interface's usability.
My only problem with the Luigi is that when I try to click on a link, sometimes he "blocks" my click by running past the cursor, and I have to click again to follow the link after he runs off. Actually I thought it was neat and I wonder if it means he actually does some secret thing in response to being clicked on, but it's probably not the best thing for the site interface's usability.
Mario and Luigi are both meant to scamper hurriedly off the view at the sight of the mouse cursor. However, sometimes they erroneously choose to run towards the mouse cursor due to a programming error. (Fitting for the site?)
However, sometimes they erroneously choose to run towards the mouse cursor due to a programming error. (Fitting for the site?)
An easy way to trigger this is to wait until Luigi appears and then wedge your cursor in between him and the edge of the page. He'll more than happily stomp all over it in a mad dash to the left edge, towards the mouse.
If nothing else, that glitch prevents me from chasing it all the way across the side of the screen sometimes :(
My concern about Luigi is that, well, having a little character running across the top of my screen makes it somewhat embarassing to browse the site in a public environment. If he only had a 5% chance of appearing, or maybe just didn't show up on the root page, that would be a lot better.
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
