Faster iframe api based player extraction.#694
Conversation
XiangRongLin
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you have some examples to back up the 1/50 size claim?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you think of a way to somehow automatically test if your new implementation is actually used and it does not just always go to the catch block with the old implementation?
I can't think of anything right away, besides making everything public.
Edit: Reasoning being that the current tests either only cover your new implementation or the old one and not both
|
What would you like to happen if the new implementation fails? Printing an error? I could move them over to two methods so that they can be individually tested. |
Normally i would say log it, but because there is no logging setup => do nothing
Yeah that's probably the easiest thing |
8d2fccb to
c2cce97
Compare
|
Done! Another thing I noticed is that the current tests do not account for the fact that the |
|
Can you also add tests for the 2 methods
You can create an issue for it. I have a rough idea on how to solve it, but finding the time to do it may prove hard |
|
Done! |
Uses the IFrame API to reduce the required download to less than 1/50 of the size.
6296183 to
bb95168
Compare
bb95168 to
557140c
Compare


Uses the IFrame API to reduce the required download to less than 1/50 of the size.
Closes #693?