On Saturday 19 February 2011 13:35:32 todd rme wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Benjamin Poulain <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> > http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100683/
> >
> > I am not a fan of listing every option. When the author of adblock add an
> > option, we will need to update the code.
> > What about just one field: hasUnsupportedOption set to true if any option
> > is not used by the filter?
> >
> > Not to mention adblock already takes its share of memory. Don't forget
> > those field will be allocated for each rule.
> >
> >
> > - Benjamin
> >
>
> Is providing filter option support updates between official rekonq releases
> a possible use-case for Aaron's synchrotron framework? I know that would be
> something down the road, but it might be worth keeping in mind when setting
> up the system now.
No, I think you misunderstood a bit the problem.
Implementing/supporting this options actually means improve one method in one
class and it is not something that can
be added as an addon
The whole adblock eventually could, we'll see it down the road implementing
plugin support.
--
Andrea Diamantini, adjam
GPG Fingerprint: 57DE 8E32 7D1A 0E16 AA52 59D8 84F9 3ECD DBF9 730F
rekonq project
WEB: http://rekonq.kde.org
IRC: rekonq@freenode
_______________________________________________
rekonq mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/rekonq
