Hi Zoltan, Testing the parser on real sites and maintaining the code are valid points, and it'd be great to share this work with the whole project...
So I'm not sure if we really would have the QA and maintenance capacity to take this solution to QtWebKit before it's ready to be landed to the trunk. Are you planning to continue working with Oliver on a solution that would be both fast and maintainable? Regards, Henry On Jun 16, 2010, at 4:14 PM, ext Zoltan Herczeg wrote: > Hi Henry, > > I would be really happy if Qt would choose this parser. Currently there > are two parser solutions in the bug, one was created by me, and the other > is by Oliver Hunt. Mine is still faster (and use less memory), but the > other is more maintainable according to Oliver. > > Although my patch passes the regression tests, it hasn't really used for > browsing yet, so it would be a great opportunity to see how it performs on > real sites. > > Thanks, > Zoltan > >> Hi everyone, >> >> Devesh pointed me to this work: >> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34019 >> >> The results seem promising, but there are concerns about maintainability. >> So while >> working towards the perfect solution, I wonder if it would be possible to >> use this implementation >> in a QtWebKit release? For example, could we consider including this in >> the QtWebKit 2.1 >> branch, once such a branch is created? >> >> Regards, >> Henry >> >> _______________________________________________ >> webkit-qt mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-qt > > > _______________________________________________ > webkit-qt mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-qt _______________________________________________ webkit-qt mailing list [email protected] http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-qt
