On Oct 14, 12:50 pm, Daniel Wagner-Hall <dawag...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Andrew Richards <tum...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Furigana Injector looks cool :) > > > For jdic-chrome, rather than fiddle much further with JavaScript > > optimizations, I think the next step to reduce memory would be simply > > to do all language-related tasks in an NPAPI plugin hosted in the > > background page, interfaced with JavaScript. Binary compatibility for > > each platform would be the only major drawback I can think of. This > > would be a larger undertaking, but if there's enough interest > > expressed, I could eventually take some time to do it. There are also > > obviously missing interface and preferences options, etc. > > Worth throwing in that from my experience of NPAPI, you're talking > about about a 1 second lag for the marshalling to happen between the > Javascript call to the C embed and the C code actually responding > doing anything...
Are you sure about that? Flash, for example, responds rather quickly to JavaScript calls. Fast enough for the YouTube player API, for example, to have blocking, synchronous calls that don't appear to slow anything down. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chromium-extensions" group. To post to this group, send email to chromium-extensions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to chromium-extensions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-extensions?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
