11 ms·
Very cool, though it would be about 114% better if they used just normal divs inside a single window. If you manage to navigate away from the browser, good luc
by bd 16y ago
Very cool, though it would be about 114% better if they used just normal divs inside a single window.
If you manage to navigate away from the browser, good luck restoring the state.
Also why to spoil beautiful content by putting chrome (lowercase) around it?
- lambda 16y agoI came here to say this. Would have been a lot better if it were all in a single window. The browser chrome doesn't help anything, and it just gives you bad associations of annoying popup ads.
- dimarco 16y agoI'm not sure about the mechanics of Chrome, but aren't new Chrome windows different processes? thus having their own share of CPU? Trying to cram everything in a single thread of execution seems like it would have been a mistake.
- sstrudeau 16y agoDo separate iframes have the same characteristics as separate windows?
- bd 16y agoNow that would be clever. Though playing the demo with one eye on Task Manager shows only two processes (for the whole duration) - one hovering mostly around 50-60% CPU load, another at 0-5%. Checking this with my CPU intensive demos, this looks like normal Chrome behavior (two processes, one with high load). New process seems to spawn only for new tabs. So it doesn't seem like such optimization was used.
- tlrobinson 16y agoI think it's something like one process per "connected" set of windows/frames (those which can talk to each other and thus are expected to be single threaded), plus one per Web Worker (V8 is not threadsafe)