From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: None (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=8.23.224.61; helo=out.smtp-auth.no-ip.com; envelope-from=kevin@carhart.net; receiver= Received: from out.smtp-auth.no-ip.com (smtp-auth.no-ip.com [8.23.224.61]) by hurricane.the-brannons.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D12F177AFE for ; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 01:06:05 -0700 (PDT) X-No-IP: carhart.net@noip-smtp X-Report-Spam-To: abuse@no-ip.com Received: from carhart.net (unknown [99.52.200.227]) (Authenticated sender: carhart.net@noip-smtp) by smtp-auth.no-ip.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3756426F; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 01:06:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from carhart.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by carhart.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v7C863tf010898; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 01:06:03 -0700 Received: from localhost (kevin@localhost) by carhart.net (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) with ESMTP id v7C862hW010892; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 01:06:02 -0700 Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 01:06:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Kevin Carhart To: Karl Dahlke cc: Edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com In-Reply-To: <20170712033052.eklhad@comcast.net> Message-ID: References: <20170622224940.eklhad@comcast.net> <20170712033052.eklhad@comcast.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.03 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: Re: [Edbrowse-dev] JS1 X-BeenThere: edbrowse-dev@lists.the-brannons.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.24 Precedence: list List-Id: Edbrowse Development List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 08:06:06 -0000 Yes.. and interval isn't even in there at all. I'm not totally clear on how these instances of timeout are used. It seems like it's more of an overall thing, like for the code that manages all the tests. I do not know what that translates into in terms of prevalence or obscurity. Also, note well that the makers of acidtests.org used variable names like kungFuDeathGrip = [e1, e2]; So it's possible that the acidtests has idiosyncracies in the first place... there may have been a lot of LSD going around when they wrote it.. On Sat, 12 Aug 2017, Karl Dahlke wrote: > Interesting that you should point this out. > My throttle is only valid for intervals, which fire repeatedly. > There are no restrictions on timers, which fire only once. > So if a timer is scheduled for now + 10ms, then it fires at now + 10ms. > However, if that timer schedules another timer for now + 10 ms, then that timer fires in 10 ms, and it continues every 10 ms, and you have found a way around my restriction. > In any browser, that's more resource intensive than a 10 ms interval. > We're constantly creating objects every 10 ms, which gc must clean up before they accumulate, etc. > It's so inefficient I'm guessing nobody would do this, except maybe an acid test. > > Karl Dahlke > -------- Kevin Carhart * 415 225 5306 * The Ten Ninety Nihilists