4 ms·
I think in most cases the polyfills end up being pretty expensive to use. I know that's the reason why I'm not able to use a flexbox polyfill at work for IE9 su
by taternuts 10y ago
I think in most cases the polyfills end up being pretty expensive to use. I know that's the reason why I'm not able to use a flexbox polyfill at work for IE9 support, though not sure if this particular feature set would be as bad to implement.
- enugu 10y agoThanks. I was unaware of this particular term which was also a good keyword for google. There is an alpha polyfill effort here. https://github.com/FremyCompany/css-grid-polyfill https://github.com/FremyCompany/css-grid-polyfill Regarding speed, here's the author's take. > I wouldn’t say this polyfill is slow by any measure, but your mileage may vary on mobile devices. My advice would be to use the polyfill only on tablets and desktops at the moment, after you have tested the compatibility and performance extensively on a representative number of devices. Also, there are js layout libraries used with similar functionality, so one can expect that it is possible to implement this feature with the same efficiency.
- gsnedders 10y agoIts author, François REMY, is now on the layout team working on Edge. I wouldn't at all be surprised if he was one of the people on the Edge team working on updating their implementation. There are definitely cases for which the polyfill is likely going to be asymptotically worse than a native implementation, though there will also be plenty of simple cases where the efficiency loss is relatively small.