Re: [Vimprobable-users] RFC: Added support for buffers

[Morgan H. <mt...@gm...>]

Hey Hannes,

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 2:39 AM, Hannes Schüller <ha...@yl...> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 01:17:26 -0500, Matthew Carter <m...@ah...>
> wrote:
>> I love that I can toggle what used to be tab specific features to a
>> set of buffers now.
>
> I'd say that's both the biggest strength and the biggest risk of this
> approach. If used right, i.e. for grouping pages of one website, this is
> extremely useful. If used wrong, i.e. to replace windows/tabs, this
> could lead to severe, unwanted breaches.

Could you elaborate on this a bit? What kind of breaches are you referring to?

> Another thing to consider: How does the browser react if one of the
> buffers misbehaves, e.g. if the page in there won't stop executing some
> stupid script or something? Will it block all other buffers as well? Do
> I have to kill them all?

This is a good point, and something I hadn't really thought about as I
hadn't yet run into this problem yet with vimprobable (unlike with
chrome :). I put together a simple test html with a javascript
infinite loop which, as somewhat expected, entirely hangs the browser.
However, this problem also exists with the current master so I don't
see that it's really anything specific to buffers aside from the
annoyance of losing multiple open pages rather than just one. I'm on
Chinese New Year break starting today through the weekend, so
hopefully I'll have some time to think about it and take a stab at
this issue. Possibly something as simple as dispatching loads to a
worker thread, which would be beneficial anyway as even pages that
load slow currently stall the gui.

> I definitely believe this is worth pursuing to see what can be done –
> just needs to be considered carefully before merging this into the main
> branch.

Agreed, and it's good that people have taken some interest in this. It
seems people really do have quite varied usage patterns, so you guys
have already brought up a number of things that I hadn't considered
for my workflow.

Regards,
Morgan