On 2018-04-18 19:13, David Teller wrote:
No plans yet, but it's a good idea. The only reason not to do this (that I can think of) is that we might prefer switching to the Bytecode Cache, which would probably give us even better speed ups.I understand that we can't use the Bytecode Cache for our chrome code yet due to the fact that it uses a very different path in Necko, which is the Source of Truth for the Bytecode Cache, but I may be wrong, and it might be fixable.
ByteCode cache is implemented "natively" only for http:// urls through http channels talking to http cache.
There is an effort to implement the alternative-data bits of the caching channel interface (implemented by the http channel now) also for channels handling chrome: and I think resource: urls. There is lately not much progress on that bug(s) to my knowledge, though.
-hb-
Cheers, David On 18/04/2018 19:09, Dave Townsend wrote:This is awesome. I understand that we already do some kind of pre-compile for our chrome code, is there any plan/benefit to switch to this eventually there?_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
