I have no plans to type in my notes from the JS meeting. If you want them,
ping me on IRC. But one thing I want to think about is how we decide what
to work on, especially performance work. Today, it's like this:
- If you're a volunteer, of course you decide what to pick up—we're just
glad you're here!
- A lot of us profile benchmarks and look for useful work in the profiles.
- Sometimes we do the same thing with random web sites.
- Bigger projects, like Waldo's work on parsing and djvj et al's work on GC
scheduling, are undertaken when we have stuff that has been showing up on
profiles "forever". This kind of work isn't driven by any one particular
measurement, like a benchmark.
Generally, I think we're working on stuff that makes sense (and have been
all along), but it's still not guaranteed to be representative of the web
as users see it. Is that fair? What else should we be doing?