On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 12:12 AM, Davis, Greg <greg.davis@pearson.com> wrote: > So, does this mean that universal selectors are not a good idea from an > implementation algorithm perspective? From the perspective of a user of CSS, > I'd definitely rather find a hack for this vs slowing down the whole > algorithm to get it :) There are different aspects here. There is the selector matching itself for a universal selector is almost like a no-op, and there is the algorithm used to figure out which elements need their style re-computed for a given change. For the latter, having ".a * {}" is a _lot_ more expensive (at least in Blink) than having ".a span {}" if you set class=a on an element with 1000 descendants where only a couple of those descendants are spans. If you want to know more details about style invalidations in Blink, [1] is still pretty valid, I think. [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vEW86DaeVs4uQzNFI5R-_xS9TcS1Cs_EUsHRSgCHGu8/edit?pli=1#heading=h.xa3ovcncd2vp -- Rune LillesveenReceived on Wednesday, 13 April 2016 12:14:01 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:02 UTC