On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:29, Erik Kay<[email protected]> wrote:
> This seems like a reasonable plan.
> It would be cool if whatever mechanism you chose could be leveraged by
> extensions as well (see the earlier extensions i18n proposal that was sent
> around last week).  For this reason I'd prefer that if we moved to a C++
> solution (as others in this thread have suggested) that it run in the
> renderer and not in the browser process (for security reasons).

I'll go back and reread that design doc to see how that might change things.

> On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:02 AM, Erik Arvidsson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Currently we use JsTemplate
>> (http://code.google.com/p/google-jstemplate/) to do our l10n of the
>> DOMUI. JST has been working well but it is a bit of an overkill to do
>> l10n of our UI. It has a couple of features that makes it slow down
>> the UI:
>>
>> 1. It uses eval for every single RHS
>> 2. It uses two nested with statements
>> 3. It traverses the whole DOM using JavaScript
>>
>> It also has some advanced features like jsselect, which allows
>> iteration, that we are using for non l10n things.
>>
>> My plan is to create a simpler solution, with almost exactly the same
>> syntax that solves the 3 bullet points above. It will not allow
>> arbitrary expressions on the RHS and it will only support jsvalues and
>> jscontent. Instead of traversing the entire tree it ill use
>> document.querySelector which does the tree traversal in C++ and uses
>> CSS selectors as the matching which is a lot faster than doing the
>> tree traversal in JS.
>>
>> Since there are still cases where we use JST to do more advanced
>> templating it will still be available but it will require opt in.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> --
>> erik
>>
>> >>
>
>



-- 
erik

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to