I've just enabled NetSurf's visited link handling. This allows links that
have been visited to be rendered differently to unvisited links.
It was originally implemented several years ago, but disabled since it had
a detrimental effect on performance.
Since then we've made many improvements to t
In article ,
Jim Nagel wrote:
> visited links
Please see my other posting in the thread "Testing required: visited link
performance".
--
Michael Drake (tlsa) http://www.netsurf-browser.org/
On Fri, 17 May 2013 13:06:07 +0100, Michael Drake wrote:
> It was originally implemented several years ago, but disabled since it had
> a detrimental effect on performance.
IIRC it took minutes to display even the Google homepage when this was
initially enabled. I'm happy to report it is not hav
In article
,
Chris Young wrote:
> except for the Wakefield show link, where I think the initial URL
> isn't being remembered by NetSurf, as the link redirects
Yep, it doesn't know about redirects. Supporting them probably requires
quite a big change.
Thanks for the feedback.
--
Michael D
On Thu, 16 May 2013 10:07:37 GMT, Tony Moore wrote:
> > > #1172 loads in 16 secs, and quits in 26 secs. The closing log is
> > > here https://dl.dropbox.com/u/77062274/Log_1172
> >
> > Thanks, please try #1175.
>
> #1175 loads in 16 secs, and quits in 3 secs (even after visiting several
> website
On Friday 17 May 2013 13:06:07 Michael Drake wrote:
> Please could people test builds #1177 and #1178 on a variety of pages and
> us know how page load times vary? I am particularly interested to hear
> from people using old hardware such as RiscPCs, Iyonixes, Ataris, etc.
I quickly tested the A
Hope this helps.
System: Iyonix
URL file size: 66k
Site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
Build #1177: 13.0s
Build #1178: 13.7s
Build #1179: 22.6s
Site: http://slashdot.org/
Build #1177: 8.5s
Build #1178: 8.4s
Build #1179: 25.0s
In article <534d633ccb...@timil.com>,
Tim Hill wrote:
> Site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
> Build #1177: 13.0s
> Build #1178: 13.7s
> Build #1179: 22.6s
> Site: http://slashdot.org/
> Build #1177: 8.5s
> Build #1178: 8.4s
> Build #1179: 25.0s
The #1179 results are odd. Was that with JavaScri
In article <534d692c69t...@netsurf-browser.org>,
Michael Drake wrote:
> In article <534d633ccb...@timil.com>,
>Tim Hill wrote:
> > Site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/
> > Build #1177: 13.0s
> > Build #1178: 13.7s
> > Build #1179: 22.6s
> > Site: http://slashdot.org/
> > Build #1177: 8.5s
>
