Closed ameshkov closed 2 years ago
Why not to disable optimization for this filter? It does not contain too much rules.
Why not to disable optimization for this filter? It does not contain too much rules.
Maybe for future use? Similar to PLATFORM
vs !#if (conditions)
.
@Alex-302 it's rather large tbh, and growing fast
Actually, we have something that can be used already: https://github.com/AdguardTeam/FiltersDownloader/commit/86a31665536b6dc55d4075972593e48b594575f4
However, I don't really like the current implementation since #include-not-optimized
is not supported by blockers.
Also, the "optimization" process is the process that we conduct server-side, it should be controlled by the !+
hints, not pre-processor directives.
@maximtop we could slightly change the definition of it: allow !+
hints to be applied to the @include
directives.
Please note, that I specifically talk about @include
and !+
directives, the ones that are interpreted by the FiltersRegistry only and not interpreted by the downloader itself.
Check this: https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdguardFilters/pull/113722#issuecomment-1077851428
Currently, we have to add a hint to every rule like this:
It'd be great if we had an option to mark multiple rules (or maybe the whole file) not optimized.
@Yuki2718 FYI