4 ms·
So, how many different parsers did you want to see in the browser again? You'd still need to support HTML4 somewhere. Supporting HTML5 separately just means du
by ori_b 16y ago
So, how many different parsers did you want to see in the browser again?
You'd still need to support HTML4 somewhere. Supporting HTML5 separately just means duplicating the common parts of the parser. The simplicity boat has already sailed.
- tedunangst 16y agoAddition is simpler than combination. HTML4 + HTML5 < HTML4 * HTML5
- ori_b 16y agoThey're extremely similar. You don't get an explosion of code size. Unless you're suggesting that HTML5 should also be radically different syntactically as well?
- tedunangst 16y agoI'm suggesting that a strict HTML5 parser that doesn't have complex recovery code is radically simpler than one that does.
- ori_b 16y agoI'm suggesting that a HTML4 parser that has complex recovery code, and a mostly-copy-and-paste HTML5 parser that doesn't isn't a big win. Browsers are going to have a complex, ugly, recovery-enabled parser in them either way, and the effort to add HTML5 to the recovery-enabled parser isn't very big, comparatively speaking.
- othermaciej 16y agoNot really true in this case. WebKit's previous HTML parser is similar in complexity to the HTML5 parser. Adding a second HTML parser would have been more code, more complexity, and a more complex test matrix.
- Retric 16y agoComplexity does not increase linearly with number of lines of code. 110k lines can easly be 5x as complex as 100k lines of code.
- sesqu 16y ago1 + 1 > 1 * 1
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]