Re: Phabricator Update, July 2017

2017-07-13 Thread David Anderson
On Thursday, July 13, 2017 at 1:38:18 PM UTC-7, Joe Hildebrand wrote: > I'm responding at the top of the thread here so that I'm not singling out any > particular response. > > We didn't make clear in this process how much work Mark and his team did > ahead of the decision to gather feedback

Re: Proposal to remove `aFoo` prescription from the Mozilla style guide for C and C++

2015-07-07 Thread David Anderson
+1 for removing this. Gecko's use is inconsistent, and outside of Gecko code that does use it, I've never seen it used in any other codebase. I've never gone to another project and thought, I miss decorating everything in a way that changes capitalization and impairs canonical naming. Reasons

Re: Proposal to remove `aFoo` prescription from the Mozilla style guide for C and C++

2015-07-07 Thread David Anderson
+1 for removing this. Gecko's use is inconsistent, and outside of Gecko code that does use it, I've never seen it used in any other codebase. I've never gone to another project and thought, I miss decorating everything in a way that changes capitalization and impairs canonical naming. Reasons

Re: AsyncPanZoom enabled for one Nightly - 4/22/2015 - Windows E10S only

2015-04-22 Thread David Anderson
On Wednesday, April 22, 2015 at 3:58:17 AM UTC-4, James May wrote: On 22 April 2015 at 12:51, David Anderson @gmail.com wrote: To get some feedback on AsyncPanZoom we are enabling it on tonight's nightly, for Windows only. It will be re-disabled in the next nightly. For those

AsyncPanZoom enabled for one Nightly - 4/22/2015 - Windows E10S only

2015-04-21 Thread David Anderson
To get some feedback on AsyncPanZoom we are enabling it on tonight's nightly, for Windows only. It will be re-disabled in the next nightly. For those unfamiliar, APZ makes scrolling responsive by pre-rendering more content than what is visible in the viewport [1]. This lets us present it

Re: Proposal: Remove Linux PGO Testing

2012-10-12 Thread David Anderson
On Thursday, October 11, 2012 5:49:07 PM UTC-7, Brian Smith wrote: I think it is important to give Linux users the fastest browser we can give them, because: It's still unclear to me what our Linux PGO builds mean. Do distributions use them? If not, are they using the exact same compiler

Re: Proposal: Remove Linux PGO Testing

2012-10-11 Thread David Anderson
Right, exactly. I am arguing that testing PGO, which is a buggy optimization pass, incurs too much developer cost to justify a 5-20% talos improvement on select benchmarks. On Linux, which is a very small percentage of our market share, and where distributions make their own builds anyway.

Re: Proposal: Remove Linux PGO Testing

2012-10-11 Thread David Anderson
Keep in mind that debug builds are probably at least an order of magnitude slower (or a large factor), whereas PGO is a very small factor. (After all, we do not PGO on Mac and it doesn't seem to be a problem.) -David On Thursday, October 11, 2012 12:05:35 AM UTC-7, Tim Taubert wrote: On

Proposal: Remove Linux PGO Testing

2012-10-10 Thread David Anderson
Hi, After being faced with the prospect of debugging Yet Another PGO-only Bug, I propose that we stop testing Linux PGO builds. One of these bugs is causing perma-red on Aurora (bug 799295). The developer cost of figuring out how to reproduce, debug, and fix these problems is quite high, and

Re: Proposal: Remove Linux PGO Testing

2012-10-10 Thread David Anderson
success with desktop PGO is much related to success with mobile PGO. -Justin On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 5:14 PM, David Anderson wrote: Hi, After being faced with the prospect of debugging Yet Another PGO-only Bug, I propose that we stop testing Linux PGO builds. One