4 ms·
But XUL was simpler, wasn't it?
by noja 7y ago
But XUL was simpler, wasn't it?
- pcwalton 7y agoMaybe marginally so in isolation? But that isn't the metric that matters, since a browser has to render HTML. HTML + XUL is more complex than just HTML.
- floatboth 7y agoThe article talks about XBL (the binding part of XUL?): > There are hard to debug complications with binding lifecycles in our UI, and very few people know how it works. > It adds enormous complexity to our platform in the frame constructor, style system, and the DOM implementation.