Auckerman: Splitting it for each line and each value, then calling p****Float
Tumulty: Hackal: except reduceRight, which goes backwards.
Thibedeau: Is there another way to p**** it faster?
Tumulty: The_2nd: make whatever produces it, give it to you in a better format
Bidle: Hackal: streams.everystream = stream.viewers = limit
Nayar: Tumulty, what would be a better format?
Tumulty: The_2nd: sounds like json that gives you an array of arrays of numbers
Bazinet: But that shouldn’t be very slow
Tumulty: Yeah, neither should be slow tho, that’s a good point
Bobet: Ok but that would work only if I want to test them. What if I want to call console.log with names of the streams which are = than limit?
Slaven: My super slow version: http://pastebin.com/3WfNzXRW
Tumulty: Hackal: then use filter
Aschbacher: Is there any sort of TCP fingerprinting you can do on clients who are opening a socket using Node.js?
Pefferman: Array.prototype.filter
Konopacki: Soteros: function filter
Aschbacher: Like can I identify if they are using Node.js
Forsee: Great, filter looks like what I need. Thank you very much again
Tumulty: Aschbacher: that’s a #node.js question, but no, i doubt it
Tumulty: Aschbacher: it’s the internet, clients can be using anything and pretending to be anything.
Bazinet: The_2nd: you might be spending more time creating arrays than parsing
Aschbacher: That’s what I thought .
Macdonnell: Hmmm i wonder if there are useragents in websockets
Bazinet: The_2nd: you could try splitting by /s/ and then just push onto one array, and see if it’s any faster
Tumulty: Soteros: of course, but user agents are utterly spoofable
Vitko: Yeah of course but that’s gonna be a minority that’s gonna bother to do that right
Bazinet: The_2nd: but it may just be slow, depending on what you are comparing it to
Woytowicz: Unless it’s some sort of DRM or a game 😛
Tumulty: Soteros: depends on the purpose, i guess. but UA sniffing is never going to lead down a good road.
Deprez: Yeah, i’d prefer not needing to know what client is your client and hope they stick to the spec
Copney: Bazinet, generating the point data server side is at least 100* faster than parsing in js client side 😀
Bazinet: The_2nd: how slow is it?
Facundo: Https://jsfiddle.net/rpf5pbsc/1/ here is the function with filter
Bazinet: The_2nd: or, what’s the server side language?
Hildreth: Hello, can someone tell me why I can zoom without distinct zoom levels on google.com/maps but have to use them when I embed a map through the API? Sorry if that is too offtopic, didn’t really know which channel would be appropriate.
Surber: Moeh: yeah sadly google maps on their site is much more functional than the API , not sure about this specific question, just commenting
Parga: Bazinet, haskell server side
Bidle: Hackal: why are you using filter instead of every there
Bazinet: The_2nd: anyway, JSON should be faster to p****
Bidle: Also, something like: function reportstreams = , limit = 10 {return streams.streams.everystream = {stream.viewers = limit}} is more like it
Prier: Bidle: because I need to call console.log; with the name of the stream
Hellweg: Soteros: Yes, the interesting thing is that in the beginning the behavior on google.com/maps is the same with regards to zooming. After a couple of seconds they apparently check something performance? browser compatibility? and Ansari the zooming without distinct levels.
Bidle: Hackal: that’s not something you should be using filter for
Bidle: If it has side-effects like that just use .forEach and console.log and set full there