Closed
Bug 459623
Opened 17 years ago
Closed 17 years ago
Clear all image notifiers from PresShell::Destroy()
Categories
(Core :: Layout, enhancement)
Core
Layout
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
WONTFIX
People
(Reporter: MatsPalmgren_bugz, Assigned: MatsPalmgren_bugz)
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
|
4.38 KB,
patch
|
dbaron
:
review-
dbaron
:
superreview-
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
Clear all image notifiers in PresShell::Destroy(), for two reasons:
1. we can skip telling the pres context to tear it down for each frame
2. we can assert that new notifiers aren't added while destroying the
frame tree
Not sure if it's worth it, your call.
Attachment #342833 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #342833 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Comment on attachment 342833 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch rev. 1
Did this show up in a profile somewhere? Otherwise, it doesn't seem worth it.
>+ //XXX Why is this done in nsFrame instead of some frame class
>+ // that actually loads images?
This comment should go, though; nearly all frames can have background images.
Comment on attachment 342833 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch rev. 1
Marking review- until questions are answered; feel free to re-request.
Attachment #342833 -
Flags: superreview?(dbaron)
Attachment #342833 -
Flags: superreview-
Attachment #342833 -
Flags: review?(dbaron)
Attachment #342833 -
Flags: review-
| Assignee | ||
Comment 3•17 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #1)
> Did this show up in a profile somewhere?
No, not really. I just printf'ed how many there were and saw that it
typically was 100 - 250. Even for pages were I didn't expect it, like
a Bugzilla bug page has 141. But you're right, it's most likely not a
significant part of shell destruction time. I do see some value in
the asserts but I guess we can live without them.
-> WONTFIX
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•