On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Evan Martin <e...@chromium.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:59 PM, Aaron Boodman <a...@chromium.org> wrote:
> > Is the idea that someday the browser and renderer processes
> > might be separate binaries?
>
> Though this shouldn't drive your decision, about 50% of our code
> weight (at least by one metric) is WebKit. You could imagine that the
> browser process doesn't need a copy of that, and that the renderer
> process doesn't need a copy of all the browser process stuff (network
> stack, UI goop). On Linux, startup time is heavily affected by the
> cost of the dynamic linker pulling in GTK, which we only would need
> from the browser process if we had separate binaries. However,
> OS-level page sharing may mean having separate binaries doesn't
> actually help too much here.
>
This is definitely something to keep in mind, but shouldn't we be able to
just compile in the bits of webkit we care about? Yeah, we'll have 2 copies
of WTF, but the rest should be pretty separate.
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Aaron Boodman <a...@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> I fear that this is really a question for Darin, who is on vacation.
Darin was there on that lunch and was actually the one who first suggested
running parts of WebCore in the browser to me during a 1:1. :-)
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
