-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
Upgrade broccoli-persistent-filter to v3 #20
Upgrade broccoli-persistent-filter to v3 #20
Conversation
04c134b
to
a886967
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Questions:
- this is a breaking change, so I assume it is ok if I release this with a major version bump?
- would this benefit from parallel builds as well?
yup!
I do not know, but googling |
a886967
to
2a3e031
Compare
Basically, if each "processString" in a broccoli-persisitent filter subclass, is entirely independent of the other, and if each one is CPU limited and sufficiently slow, we can actually run them in parallel via node worker_threads or sub-processes. This doesn't block this PR at all, but I wanted to see if this is important as it could yield an improvement if it is common for autoprefixer to be given many individual files, and the processing itself is CPU bound. If that sounds like a fit, it may be worth a future effort to make this part parallel. Let me know. |
Thanks for the confirmation. |
2a3e031
to
5de8a43
Compare
5de8a43
to
e11d885
Compare
Upgrade broccoli-persistent-filter for increased performance.
Also