daniel_serodio's profile

2 Messages

 • 

104 Points

Mon, Apr 9, 2012 4:05 PM

Closed

Do .jsxbin files run faster than .jsx ?

ExtendScript Toolkit has a File > Export as Binary command, that generates a .jsxbin file from a .jsx file. Are "binary scripts" faster, or offer any advantage besides "hiding" the source code?

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

5 y ago

It's not a "compiled" version of javascript, it's just a mangling of the source, so it should be the same speed to run. Ironically, if anything, there will be a (tiny) delay while the app un-mangles the bin into a form that can be run by the javascript interpreter.

Adobe Administrator

 • 

16K Messages

 • 

296.7K Points

5 y ago

They should run at the same speed.

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

3 y ago

I tested on a real Indesign app with a long to execute case (around 80s). jsxbin format is in the end around 6% slower than the counterpart in this test. Im disappointed, I was expecting some performance benefit for having done that extra step.

704 Messages

 • 

9.4K Points

.jsxbin is for encrypting the javascript code so others can not easily decompile the source code.  Many commercial javascripts for photoshop use .jsxbin to protect their code.