W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2015

Re: [whatwg] Relative URL plan

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 21:44:55 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnb78jnoCY56NoGuV9n0kw_bcSHMNBT6B+gp46DFwKz7-+bEA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: WHATWG <whatwg@lists.whatwg.org>
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> What optimizations are we talking about here, specifically?

Not sure. Was just indicating that we have that option if it would be
particularly painful/pointless/footgun. I haven't exactly thought it
through and there's not much feedback beyond http/https use cases.

> Note that my general view for how URL objects should work internally in
> Gecko is that we should have an immutable backing store and mutators that
> clone-with-modifications (basically copy on write).  Of course in terms of
> the web-exposed behavior we'd just have the web-exposed URL change which
> internal object it points to on mutation, so we can expose whatever mutators
> we want.

Makes sense. In retrospect I kind of wished new URL() at least started
out immutable, so it could become a native value in JavaScript some
day, but too late now.

Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2015 19:45:20 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 17:00:33 UTC