Then run some tests! Take your no brainers, apply them to a recent checkout of jQuery, and record some data!
You said that separating out IE stuff from jQuery into a separate branch would show "measurable benefits (in spead increase and stability)." I'll repeat, because you seem to have missed the point: *until* we get numbers -- from you or whoever else -- this is a pointless discussion. -- dz On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 8:39 PM, DBJDBJ<dbj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > @dz "no brainer" is not a title here ... that much is obvious. > > For me personaly it is a "no brainer" to do (for example) this : > > // Handle memory leak *only* in IE > /*cc_on > script.onload = script.onreadystatechange = null; > head.removeChild(script); > @*/ > > Instead of this : > > // Handle memory leak in IE > script.onload = script.onreadystatechange = null; > head.removeChild(script); > > I mean this practically, not hypothetically. > > --DBJ > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jQuery Development" group. To post to this group, send email to jquery-dev@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jquery-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
