On 4 Feb 2011 David J. Ruck wrote:
On 04/02/2011 11:42, Richard Porter wrote:
> The NetSurf web site says:
> "Efficiency lies at the heart of the NetSurf engine, allowing it to
> outwit the heavyweights of the web browser world. The NetSurf team
> continue to squeeze more speed out of their code."
> I've been doing one or two comparisons on a 300MHz Kinetic RiscPC
> running OS 6.16.
> Test 1 - following a link to near the bottom of a thumbnail index.
> Test 2 - following a link to the latest forum post from the
> latest posts page.
How about URLs so people can see what those pages contain? Such as
elements which the older browsers will just ignore.
MM,v=display,m=1296606335,s=4,highlight=#num4). I don't think the
concerned with confirming delete requests, which obviously doesn't
work in NS.
> Now obviously there's a big advantage in coding in assembler
> specific processor family rather than using C and making the code
Coding in assembler is a big disadvantage for any sizeable amount of
code. You wont find any modern web browser written in assembler, it
would be insane.
According to Rob the older browsers were written in C anyway, so
that's not a factor. I agree entirely with your second sentence for a
whole raft of reasons, but execution speed isn't one of them.
Richard Porter http://www.minijem.plus.com/
I don't want a "user experience" - I just want stuff that works.