On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Jim Roskind <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it was a GIANT step forward when Chromium survived renderer crashes. > I'm not all that clear that another level of process-division would > increase robustness, and more importantly, increase customer satisfaction.
I think renderer process separation was important in part because the web is very complicated: the space of allowable web pages is infinite and all of the parts are interlocking. The rest of the application is much more controllable in terms of complexity, and I think because of that the browser-side crashes we see are of a different flavor that can be pinned on bad test coverage and overly complex code. So one way to approach this is more separation of concerns at "compile time": that is, better factoring of separate modules (and fewer singletons!) that would allow more relatively independent tests. For example close to my heart: my last stab at refactoring the way we query plugins ended up running into subtle issues with how the metrics service shuts down relative to the UI and IO loops. These pieces need to talk to one another but our current system of needing to carefully puzzle through relative lifetimes, races, and refcounts doesn't seem scalable. -- Chromium Developers mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
