On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Jussi Kalliokoski < jussi.kalliokoski@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually this reminds me... Is this actually a bug by the spec? I don't > think the current spec has any special rules for the ScriptProcessorNode > GC, so following the AudioNode garbage collection information in the spec, > it looks like ScriptProcessorNodes shouldn't be kept around if there aren't > any references to them. Is it time to discuss the GC rules in the spec? Now that we've implemented most of the relevant infrastructure, I'm more convinced than ever that the spec shouldn't say anything about GC. UAs can and should automatically prune out nodes that can't contribute to future output. Nothing needs to be said in the spec about how and when this is done. These optimizations should have no observable effects. Rob -- Wrfhf pnyyrq gurz gbtrgure naq fnvq, “Lbh xabj gung gur ehyref bs gur Tragvyrf ybeq vg bire gurz, naq gurve uvtu bssvpvnyf rkrepvfr nhgubevgl bire gurz. Abg fb jvgu lbh. Vafgrnq, jubrire jnagf gb orpbzr terng nzbat lbh zhfg or lbhe freinag, naq jubrire jnagf gb or svefg zhfg or lbhe fynir — whfg nf gur Fba bs Zna qvq abg pbzr gb or freirq, ohg gb freir, naq gb tvir uvf yvsr nf n enafbz sbe znal.” [Znggurj 20:25-28]
Received on Wednesday, 20 March 2013 03:28:53 UTC