- From: Ian Kilpatrick <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 10:53:34 -0700
- To: whatwg/dom <dom@noreply.github.com>
- Cc:
- Message-ID: <whatwg/dom/issues/270/227217991@github.com>
cc/ @drufball @esprehn @n8schloss @domenic has summarized some of my thoughts up pretty well, but I'd just like to add my 2c. :) This proposal has three parts that are potential performance benefits. (1) Worker Construction of Tree. Having something that is transferrable sounds great. Moving more script logic off the critical path is something that authors have typically struggled with. It may be worth thinking about this part of the problem as a separate API which integrates nicely with this proposal, and regular DOM APIs? (2) Tree Construction We haven't seen in traces that we've performed that the bindings cost is the bottleneck here. For this part of the proposal we'd really love to see some data on this to be convinced that this is an issue worth solving. @wycats , you mentioned some experiments with `cloneNode` you did? Do you have data on this? It looks like that this is a pretty simple API to actually implement (if you are just worried about the bindings type cost); getting numbers from someone wouldn't be too hard? If there is a significant performance difference: this should then be compared to a polyfill of the current DOM API on top of this API. I.e. when a sync DOM API is called, perform the mutation list synchronously. Blink's implementation has the ability to create IDL APIs that live in javascript instead of cpp. If this is a huge performance win, then theoretically engines could change their implementations to mitigate this. Again, we really need numbers to be convinced here. (3) `applyChanges` It will soon be possible in blink for us to `styleRecalc` separately from `layout` and be able to "smear" work for a particular DOM mutation over multiple frames. This was the initial motivation behind [`asyncAppend`](https://github.com/drufball/async-append); the fact that when you append DOM, it will typically jank that frame as more work is needed to be done than is possible in one frame. We think it's really valuable for engines to be able to resolve `applyChanges` multiple frames after the initial request. One thing that I think is missing in this API is the "DoItNow" button. I.e. calling this api would perform all the changes synchronously like the current DOM APIs. As an example, say your UI can tolerate 100ms (~6frames) of the async DOM not appearing, but after that it would prefer to jank the main thread, as opposed to delaying further. A sync "commit" function would do this. One way to do this with the current API would be: ```js changes = new DOMChangeList(); /* build up changes here */ changes.execute().then(() => { // changes aren't actually performed until you call "commit" here? // e.g. all the style/layout/etc work is performed. "commit" just makes it appear in the DOM tree. changes.commit(); }); requestAnimationFrame(() => { changes.commit(); // Promise above is now not resolved, as already done "commit". }); ``` We see really large benefits from this part. ^-^. --- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/whatwg/dom/issues/270#issuecomment-227217991
Received on Monday, 20 June 2016 17:54:16 UTC