[whatwg] Proposal for separating script downloads and execution

timeless timeless at gmail.com
Wed Feb 9 01:02:29 PST 2011

On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Glenn Maynard <glenn at zewt.org> wrote:
> - The "scripts in comments" hack would be unneeded.  That's an unpleasant
> hack, because it will both prevent browsers from caching compiled scripts,
> and prevent scripts from being compiled in the background.  Specifying a
> bogus file type also has these problems.

i don't think a script in comments prevents caching.

in the end at some point someone sends a string to a js engine for execution

the js engine is free to generate bytecode or native code, it's also
free to recognize that it has already parsed that given string and has
a copy of the corresponding bytecode/native code.

as for compiling in the background, again, nothing prevents this, if
you have idle cycles you're free to speculatively parse whatever you
like. it might not be a great idea, but it isn't forbidden. as a
quality of impl issue, an agent is free to recognize when a given site
pulls things out of comments and note to itself (or its peers) in the
future to speculatively parse comments for that site.

More information about the whatwg mailing list