生产中的CEF3单处理模式 [英] CEF3 single process mode in production

问题描述

在生产中使用单处理模式是否有真正的陷阱？官方声明似乎不鼓励这样做，但是到目前为止，申请一直是稳定的。 CEF1似乎已被放弃，如果将CEF3单进程用于开发，则后者至少应成为测试套件的一部分，因此是稳定的。还是不对？

Are there any real pitfalls in using single process mode in production? The official statement seems to discourage this, but so far the application has been stable. CEF1 seems to have been abandoned, and if CEF3 single process is used for dev, then the latter should be at the very least be part of the test suite, and therefore stable. Or is that not true?

此外，CEF3单进程是否不等同于CEF1？新的Battle.net启动器正在使用CEF1（1453）。我想知道这是出于遗留原因还是避免使用CEF3的明智决定。

Also, is CEF3 single process not equivalent to CEF1? The new Battle.net launcher is using CEFl (1453). I wonder if that was for legacy reasons or if that was a conscious decision to avoid using CEF3.

推荐答案

这个问题经常重复出现在 cef的论坛上。简短的答案是别走这条路。

This question is repeated often on cef's forum. The short answer is "don't take this path".

有时，某些错误会在单处理模式和官方词语中弹出。从cef的维护者那里得知，此模式不受支持。

There are, from time to time, certain bugs that pops up on the single process mode and the official word from cef's maintainer is that this mode is unsupported, period. I think this is worded too lightly on the documentation, though.

来自cef1背景的人倾向于按旧的方式进行操作，因此单进程模式似乎是一个不错的选择。的路要走，但较新的（现在已经使用了几年的）cef3高度依赖于铬的内部构造，而这些内部构造完全基于多种生产工艺。

People coming from cef1 background tends to keep doing it the old way, so single process mode seems like a good way to go, but the newer (now years old) cef3 highly depends on chromium's internals, and these are solely based on multiple process for production.

这篇关于生产中的CEF3单处理模式的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！