On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Darin Fisher <[email protected]> wrote:
> The problem is that no matter how you cut it, you end up violating the > run-to-completion (non-reentrant) constraint of javascript. > This problem is further complicated by the fact that Flash can also cause > script to execute in the web page, and all web pages use the same Flash > process (same Flash thread even). > FWIW, we could do "better" here, though probably not perfect, with the following set of changes: * Move from one plugin process to one plugin process per tab group, so that Flash etc. don't introduce additional tab dependencies beyond what JS introduces. * Be as aggressive as possible about breaking script dependencies between tabs. Perhaps we can somehow use the garbage collector to realize a page doesn't have a reference to the window it just opened and thus can't script it, or something. The idea is to make tabs be in distinct processes as frequently as possible. (Perhaps there is even more we can do if we're willing to break some small part of the web; I'm just speculating wildly.) * Make alerts tab-group-modal instead of app-modal, and hope that the typical number of tabs in a tab group is 1. PK --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
