41–50 of 97 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much memory is saved here? http://www.httparchive.org/interesting.php?a=All&l=Dec%202%2... 52 _kilobytes_ ? Really?
The browser would have to save the source text for EVERY tab it opens, regardless of whether you view source or not. That seems more onerous than making a separate request for the source code every once in a while.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but if you have more than enough memory, then that's no problem. So, the browser should load the HTML page into a part of memory that can be discarded by the OS if the OS needs more memory. Actually I think it is strange that no such memory API exists in Unix. EDIT: Anyway, storing it in the browser's file cache would also do the trick, I suppose :)
Isn't that one of the issues nowadays, that people have the attitude "we have enough memory" and thus don't tend to care about optimizing for memory usage anymore. Your suggested solution, about discarding when memory is needed, solves this problem. But it solves a problem that would be created by needlessly storing a lot more data than needed. So it's a solution to a problem that was not a problem to begin with. But…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but if you have more than enough memory, then that's no problem. So, the browser should load the HTML page into a part of memory that can be discarded by the OS if the OS needs more memory. Actually I think it is strange that no such memory API exists in Unix. EDIT: Anyway, storing it in the browser's file cache would also do the trick, I suppose :)
Isn't that one of the issues nowadays, that people have the attitude "we have enough memory" and thus don't tend to care about optimizing for memory usage anymore. Your suggested solution, about discarding when memory is needed, solves this problem. But it solves a problem that would be created by needlessly storing a lot more data than needed. So it's a solution to a problem that was not a problem to begin with. But…
Your phone is in disagreement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Couldn't you reconstruct the source from the internal dom representation anyway?
No. The parser corrects and changes the source to make the DOM. So it is impossible to find errors usually. So things like: the parser will correct, and therefore the DOM will be correct. But what it does to fix this may break your site. I often found the CSS would be screwed up for many reasons (rules don't match DOM structure -- due to bugs all over our codebase)
Where it could get interesting though, is if the content changes before you view the source. In that case, you're out of luck I guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The browser would have to save the source text for EVERY tab it opens, regardless of whether you view source or not. That seems more onerous than making a separate request for the source code every once in a while.
Yes, but if you have more than enough memory, then that's no problem. So, the browser should load the HTML page into a part of memory that can be discarded by the OS if the OS needs more memory. Actually I think it is strange that no such memory API exists in Unix. EDIT: Anyway, storing it in the browser's file cache would also do the trick, I suppose :)
https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2015/09/tab-discar...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much memory is saved here? http://www.httparchive.org/interesting.php?a=All&l=Dec%202%2... 52 _kilobytes_ ? Really?
The browser would have to save the source text for EVERY tab it opens, regardless of whether you view source or not. That seems more onerous than making a separate request for the source code every once in a while.
We are talking about hundreds of KBs of memory total which is nothing and if it's a worry for mobile devices we have the disk. It's not a feature that demands instant performance.
I seem to recall that it wasn't always the case.
True and I was shocked that the referenced mozilla bug[1] is from 2006. Time really flies because it feels like yesterday I could view source without re-loading it. [1]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=307089
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The browser would have to save the source text for EVERY tab it opens, regardless of whether you view source or not. That seems more onerous than making a separate request for the source code every once in a while.
Am I in some parallel universe here ? We are talking about hundreds of KBs of memory total which is nothing and if it's a worry for mobile devices we have the disk. It's not a feature that demands instant performance.
Hence it's acceptable to request the document from the server when opening 'View Source'.
It's a bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=307089 Or, it's a memory saving feature. To implement "View source from cache" requires keeping around the raw page HTML, which you might not otherwise need after parsing - except you probably will for all the developer tools to work, so this probably should just be considered bug.
Why would you need the original HTML for dev tools to work? Maybe there are ones I've never seen but the ones I use are using the DOM rather than the original HTML string.