Talk:Thunderbird:Thunderbird3: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Sounds good. I've adjusted the copy. --davida | Sounds good. I've adjusted the copy. --davida | ||
=== Comments on 'Architectural cleanup' === | |||
I know some people don't share my love of JavaScript, but I'd like to see the architectural cleanup include an audit of mail components for possible candidates to move from C++ to JS. Firefox has gone this route for components not on perf-critical paths, for example the search service or the download manager. Advantages include virtually crash-proof code and no reference counting. Also, it seems as though Mozilla2 will be moving even more things to JavaScript (with ES4), so getting a head-start on this would be good. | |||
--jminta | |||
Revision as of 04:48, 4 January 2008
Comments on 'Better Extensibility'
Personally, I think it'd be better to simply point tb extension developers at #maildev on IRC. There's so much that can be learned just by reading scrollback, and splitting up the mail-expertise and mail-scrollback would seem like a loss to me. Also, splitting channels makes it less likely that someone will be around to answer a question in either channel, which just leads to frustration. --jminta
Sounds good. I've adjusted the copy. --davida
Comments on 'Architectural cleanup'
I know some people don't share my love of JavaScript, but I'd like to see the architectural cleanup include an audit of mail components for possible candidates to move from C++ to JS. Firefox has gone this route for components not on perf-critical paths, for example the search service or the download manager. Advantages include virtually crash-proof code and no reference counting. Also, it seems as though Mozilla2 will be moving even more things to JavaScript (with ES4), so getting a head-start on this would be good. --jminta