- Original Message -
Not to derail this further with a defense of the CC, but...
> CC is still a performance and memory and safety problem.
At this point, I think the GC is a bigger performance problem. ;) Ok, so it is
doing much more stuff than the CC...
> Yeah, I shouldn't have men
> What devices need to render full-fidelity web pages and can't afford
> that price?
The current devices people were interested in targeting were 64MB and
did not need full-fidelity web. They were actively pushing to reduce
the HW requirement to 32MB. I cannot defend these requirements, but
those
> > Are UTF8-backed (as opposed to Latin1-backed) JS strings with random access
> > going to be a real possibility in SpiderMonkey? It’s obviously possible to
> > make random access work with an appropriate indexing data structure, but
> > popular JS benchmarks are pretty sensitive to string perfor
On 08/07/14 02:53, Jack Moffitt wrote:
> this was about a much lower memory device. It's not clear it's even
> possible, but the question was whether we could ever fit in 32MB.
> There is significant interest internally and externally in low memory
> deployment.
How much, in volume, does 128MB of
4 matches
Mail list logo
