2013-07-04 12:08, Robert O'Callahan skrev: > On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Marcus Geelnard <mage@opera.com > <mailto:mage@opera.com>> wrote: > > The only real concern I have seen so far for *not* fixing the API > is performance. > > > To be clear, it's only the performance of existing content. I think > it's pretty clear we can add new APIs that give equivalent performance > to the racy approach, without the races. If that's the case, I'd have to state again that I think that the performance of existing content must be of very low priority. We could easily add a "best practices for optimal performance" section to a porting guide, or as a separate Wiki page somewhere on MDN for instance. Again, I don't find anything strange about making old interfaces suboptimal compared to new interfaces (especially given that the old API was experimental). People that care about performance tend to not be too sensitive to API changes. Kind of reminds me of when graphics hardware switched from dedicated hardware for the fixed function OpenGL/DX pipeline to an emulated pipeline via programmable shaders - anyone interested in performance dropped the FF code paths and switched to shaders (even if it in this particular case meant a lot of work). /Marcus > > Even for existing content, with a little more complexity (already > implemented in Gecko), I'm pretty sure we can have similar performance > to Blink/Webkit. If Chris produces examples whose performance he cares > about, I can test that theory. > > Rob > -- > Jtehsauts tshaei dS,o n" Wohfy Mdaon yhoaus eanuttehrotraiitny > eovni le atrhtohu gthot sf oirng iyvoeu rs ihnesa.r"t sS?o Whhei csha > iids teoa stiheer :p atroa lsyazye,d 'mYaonu,r "sGients uapr,e > tfaokreg iyvoeunr, 'm aotr atnod sgaoy ,h o'mGee.t" uTph eann dt > hwea lmka'n? gBoutt uIp waanndt wyeonut thoo mken.o w * > * -- Marcus Geelnard Technical Lead, Mobile Infrastructure Opera Software
Received on Thursday, 4 July 2013 11:50:04 UTC