|
|
|
|
|
by BrendanEich
2814 days ago
|
|
Manuel Araoz did a very early benchmark, one site, where we beat uBO. I don't cite it as fresh or large-N/controlled, but Manuel noticed and asked why. The reason is extensions must be in JS, in API and process sandboxes. uBO does great, uses the chromium extension background page facility to share code among tabs, but still must use JS. C++ beats JS. Also, we block ASAP in the network threads, in the browser "kernel" process. That helps win too. If anyone wants to benchmark, results welcome, but we do not view uBO on Chrome as competition -- rather we cooperate on blocking tech where we can with @gorhill et al. We are out to take unblocked Chrome user share. |
|
I understand that you are not competing with uBlock. But I’m always a bit sceptical when I read that it’s faster because it’s C++. Since it is not necessarily true and some measurement is needed before being able to reach this conclusion. I understand though that blocking from the network gives some (constant factor?) advantage compared to a JavaScript extension.