Re: [Edbrowse-dev] JS1

[Kevin Carhart <kevin@carhart.net>]

> Is there really a site that *needs* timers faster than 500ms for nonvisual purposes?
> Kevin you've combed through the acid tests, is this a concern?

Hmmm.... I'm in the file right now and I'm searching 'imeout' to try to
find instances of setTimeout and 'nterval' to try to find instances of 
setInterval.

setInterval doesn't appear at all.

setTimeout appears only twice.  In both cases, it's called like this:
             setTimeout(update, delay);

So what values does the variable 'delay' hold?  It's set to 10 higher up.

   var delay = 10;

However, there is also this reference to 5000ms in a comment:

           // we will give this test 500 attempts (5000ms) before aborting

So based on what value they hardcoded, maybe you could conclude from this 
that the scale along which they are mapping the range from good 
responsiveness to poor responsiveness is measured in seconds and not 
tenths of a second?  If that is right, I think the answer to your question 
is probably no and 500ms is faster than the values they used most of the 
time.  500ms is only 50 attempts, when they're willing to give the client 
ten times as long as that to finish a test.

Kevin