[quanta-devel] Re: WebCore 146

[Luis Miguel García Mancebo]

I don't know too much about this. It's the first time, and I would be very 
interested in helping integrating this into quanta, but, there isn't a way of 
taking this in little pieces and not in one big .tar.gz?

Thanks,

El Wednesday, 7 de July de 2004 02:03, Zack Rusin escribió:
> On Tuesday 06 July 2004 18:38, Dave Hyatt wrote:
> > Incremental patches for large features like HTML editing would have
> > been fairly pointless.  I'd argue that even merging it now in its
> > current state would be of little benefit.
>
> That's good to know. Thanks.
> I'm forwarding your email to the Quanta guys since besides Leo they were
> the ones working on khtml editting the most on our side.
>
> Quanta guys, could you take a look at the html editting implementation
> in the new webcore at
> http://darwinsource.opendarwin.org/tarballs/other/WebCore-146.1.tar.gz
> and let me know what you think?
>
> > Breaks down primarily into:
> > (1) Performance (style system improvements and atomization of
> > attribute values).  We're about 30% faster.
>
> Yeah, that's the thing we'll have to merge. I think Dirk started looking
> into it and had problems figuring out where does the speed improvement
> come from. Do you recall what exactly caused such a huge speedup?
>
> > (2) HTML Editing (in the new subdir plus changes to line layout to
> > make it smarter about only repainting changed lines)
>
> That will wait.
>
> > (3) Dashboard Support (new widgets input type=search, range and
> > canvas and composite attr on image)
>
> Shame that you were not allowed to be spreading the news about this one.
> I had canvas (well, i called it painter) implementation for quite a
> while now because I was playing with client side rendering and you
> could have gotten it for free.
>
> Those will also wait because we're already in a freeze for 3.3 and these
> are hardly essential. They will be merged though.
>
> > (4) Bug Fixes
>
> Obviously would love to have it, but we'll need to figure out what they
> were.
>
> > We could not show patches for (2) or (3).  I did send out the style
> > system improvements in (1) to khtml-devel.  I agree we could be
> > better about (4), but often these overlapped with work in (2).
>
> The big question is: besides the style optimization patch is there
> anything you think should be merged sooner rather than later?
> That would be really helpful to know. Even such a small thing as letting
> us know that merging html editting would be of little benefit is
> immensely helpful simply because it saves us time of having to find out
> about it the hard way :)
>
> Zack

-- 
Luis Miguel García Mancebo
Universidad de Deusto / Deusto University
Spain