Bundling vs sending serialized dependency graph
ian at hixie.ch
Thu Aug 21 10:08:36 PDT 2014
On Thu, 21 Aug 2014, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 11:54 AM, John Barton <johnjbarton at google.com> wrote:
> > Where? The Load Request records imply a dependency graph. Are these
> > maintained though out the life of the page? I don't see any existing
> > reason to expect these are maintained.
> Ian's proposal (well, mutation in general) certainly implies that these
> (or an appropriate summary) should be maintained. Again, possibly you
> can drop parts of the graph from memory once all requests have been
> fulfilled... but I think that's an implementation optimization. The
> simplest spec would just stipulate a persistent dependency graph. I'd
> guess that you'd want to restrict arbitrary reads of the graph in order
> to allow the optimization. Write-only access would be best.
I don't think we need to maintain the dependency graph beyond the link
stage. Once something is linked, it doesn't really matter if the
dependency is still true or not, since it doesn't make any difference --
it can't block the load any more. So I'm happy with the way the ES6 spec
discards the dependency information. The important change IMHO is that the
dependency information be maintained from earlier in the cycle, and be
mutable (write-only would be fine, assuming you can remove dependencies;
there's no need, IMHO, to expose the actual dependency chain to script).
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the es-discuss