Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Decopi" data-source="post: 867247" data-attributes="member: 67091">With all due respect, CleanURLs is not what you&#039;re trying to promote in this post.CleanURLs&#039; main function, as its name says, is to clean urls (url tracking parameters). In simple words, the main function is to remove part of url links. That&#039;s all. Period!Now, please do a simple test at CleanURLs: Keep only the url clean function (turn off everything else, &quot;hyperlink&quot;, &quot;ETag&quot; etc)... and you will see that CleanURLs blocks almost nothing. In simple words: You&#039;re using a bazooka to kill mosquitoes. Every webpage you load, will need to pass hundreds of RegExps, just to filter very few url tracking parameters. It&#039;s a waste of resources, with negative browser performance.Currently 90% of what CleanURLs blocks are &quot;hyperlinks&quot; and &quot;ETags&quot;. However, both functions can be achieved without using add-ons at all!It&#039;s ridiculous to use CleanURLs in order to block &quot;hyperlink&quot; and &quot;ETags&quot;, is a distortion of what supposes to be the add-on main function: Just to remove part of urls.In the other hand, the removal of url tracking parameters doesn&#039;t need long or updated JS&#039; scripts, nor hundreds of RegExps.The small bit of JS&#039; script that removes parts of an url, is the same and it will be the same code for the next years... it&#039;s an universal JS&#039; script, and is very small, lightweight and efficient.And with regards to RegExps (url tracking parameters), average users will be fine with just 20 generalist RegExps. If someone needs to block specific parameters, again, the efficient way is to customize these blocking parameters (instead of using hundred of unknown RegExps). Same logic goes to blocking lists, 90% of any list always remains unused, but is consuming lot of resources).I was one of the first CleanURLs&#039; testers/reviewers. Also long time ago, I was the person who introduced CleanURLs to ghacksuserjs,&nbsp; in order to include the add-on in the &quot;recommended category&quot;.But sadly, CleanURLs got worse over time. CleanURLs is the typical example of an add-on that time ago started very slim and focused, but with time became a big pachyderm add-on, unfocused, trying to do in a bad and inefficient way what many other add-ons are doing perfectly fine by using just 10% of resources.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Decopi, post: 867247, member: 67091"] With all due respect, CleanURLs is not what you're trying to promote in this post. CleanURLs' main function, as its name says, is to clean urls (url tracking parameters). In simple words, the main function is to remove part of url links. That's all. Period! Now, please do a simple test at CleanURLs: Keep only the url clean function (turn off everything else, "hyperlink", "ETag" etc)... and you will see that CleanURLs blocks almost nothing. In simple words: You're using a bazooka to kill mosquitoes. Every webpage you load, will need to pass hundreds of RegExps, just to filter very few url tracking parameters. It's a waste of resources, with negative browser performance. Currently 90% of what CleanURLs blocks are "hyperlinks" and "ETags". However, both functions can be achieved without using add-ons at all! It's ridiculous to use CleanURLs in order to block "hyperlink" and "ETags", is a distortion of what supposes to be the add-on main function: Just to remove part of urls. In the other hand, the removal of url tracking parameters doesn't need long or updated JS' scripts, nor hundreds of RegExps. The small bit of JS' script that removes parts of an url, is the same and it will be the same code for the next years... it's an universal JS' script, and is very small, lightweight and efficient. And with regards to RegExps (url tracking parameters), average users will be fine with just 20 generalist RegExps. If someone needs to block specific parameters, again, the efficient way is to customize these blocking parameters (instead of using hundred of unknown RegExps). Same logic goes to blocking lists, 90% of any list always remains unused, but is consuming lot of resources). I was one of the first CleanURLs' testers/reviewers. Also long time ago, I was the person who introduced CleanURLs to ghacksuserjs, in order to include the add-on in the "recommended category". But sadly, CleanURLs got worse over time. CleanURLs is the typical example of an add-on that time ago started very slim and focused, but with time became a big pachyderm add-on, unfocused, trying to do in a bad and inefficient way what many other add-ons are doing perfectly fine by using just 10% of resources. [/QUOTE]

Verification