Mozilla Firefox

Bug #125970
Comment #200

Comment 200 for bug 125970

Revision history for this message

In Mozilla Bugzilla #201307, Unknown W. Brackets (unknownbrackets) wrote on 2008-05-23:

#200

(In reply to comment #125)
> ... but all this is about background-position: fixed which is bug 90198, not
> this bug 201307. This 201307 bug shouldn't be far from being fixed if bug
> 203439 has been fixed. Again, I still think this bug should be resolved as
> WFM... unless someone can bring something real, concrete, reproducible, good
> testcase, etc... Who here experienced "slow scrolling" with attachment 139911 [details]
> and with provided URL (http://www.w3.org/Style/Examples/007/scrollbars.html)?

Ah, I confused this with that one (actually I thought they were the same, but now that I delve into my memory, I remember that there were two bugs after all.) Before I didn't care about that other one, because I thought it was reasonably fast.... then I forgot they were different bugs.

Sorry for the bugspam. IMHO, as a developer, I don't think this needs to be fixed at all for 3.0 or anything. Virtually no sites use position: fixed, it's not (or wasn't once) well supported across browsers anyway iirc.

That said, bug 90198 really is about a more general problem of it "being slow". Probably I'm looking for a more specific bug for this actual regression.

Sorry for the bugspam.

As for that attachment, it scrolls identically for me in Bon Echo and Minefield, and what's more, very quickly and without shearing. Again, I totally agree this bug is probably not a huge issue (and from the comments which I just looked over again, seems to find a lot of people confusing it with backgrounds.)

(In reply to comment #126)
> > preform this test
> > by consistently scrolling the mousewheel.
> >
> > Minefield (smoothScroll OFF): 00:08.2
> > Minefield (smoothScroll ON): 00:14.0
>
> That has to be bug 202718, not *this* bug.
>

Not really. I don't care about smooth scrolling. It's easier to reproduce using smooth scrolling (likely because of that bug) but I'm talking about the *recent* change in speed of scrolling with fixed backgrounds (compared to Bon Echo) whether smooth scrolling is enabled or not.

That bug is about both versions (and even older too), and I see shearing on the page it references even with my hardware and Bon Echo.

-[Unknown]

Ah, I confused this with that one (actually I thought they were the same, but now that I delve into my memory, I remember that there were two bugs after all.)  Before I didn't care about that other one, because I thought it was reasonably fast.... then I forgot they were different bugs.

Sorry for the bugspam.  IMHO, as a developer, I don't think this needs to be fixed at all for 3.0 or anything.  Virtually no sites use position: fixed, it's not (or wasn't once) well supported across browsers anyway iirc.

That said, bug 90198 really is about a more general problem of it "being slow".  Probably I'm looking for a more specific bug for this actual regression.

Sorry for the bugspam.

As for that attachment, it scrolls identically for me in Bon Echo and Minefield, and what's more, very quickly and without shearing.  Again, I totally agree this bug is probably not a huge issue (and from the comments which I just looked over again, seems to find a lot of people confusing it with backgrounds.)

(In reply to comment #126)
> > preform this test
> > by consistently scrolling the mousewheel. 
> > 
> > Minefield (smoothScroll OFF): 00:08.2
> > Minefield (smoothScroll ON): 00:14.0
> 
> That has to be bug 202718, not *this* bug.
>

Not really.  I don't care about smooth scrolling.  It's easier to reproduce using smooth scrolling (likely because of that bug) but I'm talking about the *recent* change in speed of scrolling with fixed backgrounds (compared to Bon Echo) whether smooth scrolling is enabled or not.

That bug is about both versions (and even older too), and I see shearing on the page it references even with my hardware and Bon Echo.

-[Unknown]