3 ms·

Hi pcwalton, I just wish Servo had clearer goals. In some ways the recent faster-browser initiates have all come out empty in my opinion, as they have nothing t

by Touche 11y ago

Hi pcwalton, I just wish Servo had clearer goals. In some ways the recent faster-browser initiates have all come out empty in my opinion, as they have nothing to truly show the for the work. Flexbox is a great example. We were told the problems with DOM updates was caused by the old layouts and things like floats. So Flexbox was supposed to fix those problems. Where's the proof? I find myself frustrated that now 8 years after the iPhone the web is still incapable of so many things. I wish the browser community would make some very specific goals and say "we'll do whatever it takes to reach these". Here's a very simple goal: A swipeable sidebar. Here's the requirements: * It must retain 60fps no matter how fast you swipe. * It must be easy to create; a virtual-dom shouldn't be a requirement to make up for slow dom updates. A elaborate library that correctly times everything shouldn't be necessary. That's it. Make that happen. Do whatever it takes. Create another new layout if necessary. Create a new touch spec that's faster, if necessary. Whatever. it. takes. And then when the work is done you can point to this new widget and say that the initiative paid off.

pcwalton 11y ago
> Hi pcwalton, I just wish Servo had clearer goals. What is not clear about "parallelize all parts of the pipeline", "get rendering GPU bound", and "write a memory safe browser"? > Flexbox is a great example. We were told the problems with DOM updates was caused by the old layouts and things like floats. Nobody said that. > So Flexbox was supposed to fix those problems. No, it wasn't. > I find myself frustrated that now 8 years after the iPhone the web is still incapable of so many things. Me too. > Here's a very simple goal: A swipeable sidebar. You can do it already at 60 FPS. Make an overflow:scroll div and allow the user to scroll it into view. Or even just do it manually with the DOM. It will easily be 60 FPS in existing engines if you animate transforms. > That's it. Make that happen. Do whatever it takes. Create another new layout if necessary. Create a new touch spec that's faster, if necessary. Whatever. it. takes. And then when the work is done you can point to this new widget and say that the initiative paid off. There's nothing to do here, as you've described it. But your comment is actually illustrative of the real problem (at least, what I think it is). We have a ton of ways to do things on the Web. Some of them are fast, and some of them are not. Web developers don't realize what the fast paths are (which is not entirely their fault). I think that all of the paths should be fast, and I think that many of Servo's technologies (such as WebRender) go a long way toward making that happen. What's frustrating is comments like yours that describe things that the Web can clearly already do and blame browsers for supposedly being unable to do simple things. I used to think the way you did—that the Web is incapable of rendering a 60 FPS scrollable view—and then quickly discovered that, if optimized properly, there is actually no problem. What I think the problem with Web slowness is that Web authors don't know what the fast paths are, and they use things like jQuery.animate() that hit all the slow paths. That is a problem that I think we are well equipped to solve in Servo due to things like parallel style recalculation, off main thread layout, and WebRender, but it's a lot more nuanced than what you describe.
- Touche 11y ago
  > What is not clear about "parallelize layout" and "make better use of hardware"? The lack of a before/after demo. > No, it wasn't. What, specifically, were the performance goals then? > This is already done. Link?
  - pcwalton 11y ago
    > The lack of a before/after demo. See the graphs here: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTgzNDA https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTgzNDA We also have various real-world performance demos showing that, for certain workloads, parallelism results in measurable FPS wins. I haven't wanted to get on stage and publicize them at this point, because it's early. But we do have them. > What, specifically, were the performance goals then? I wasn't involved with the design of flexbox, but I didn't see performance as the main goal. Rather, the goal was to make "springs and struts"-style UI layout easy to use, because simulating it in CSS2 had bad ergonomics. Performance wins, if anything, would be relative to doing all of the layout manually in JavaScript, not relative to the CSS2 primitives. Historically, relatively little attention has been paid to layout performance at all. The main performance wars have concerned DOM performance and JavaScript. (Look at what Dromaeo tests, for example.) > Link? I don't have time to create an actual demo for the specific thing you're asking for, but I've done many similar tests. Animating transforms will achieve 60FPS.
    - Touche 11y ago
      > See the graphs here: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTgzNDA https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTgzNDA That's not what I'm asking for. You're pointing to low-level metrics and I'm asking for high-level examples of things not achievable today that Servo will enable. > I don't have time to create an actual demo for the specific thing you're asking for, but I've done many similar tests. Animating transforms will achieve 60FPS. Understandable, well I know there are many such widgets on the web and I've never come across one that fits my requirements. Maybe they are all doing things as slowly as possible, but I doubt it.

by Touche 11y ago

pcwalton 11y ago

> Hi pcwalton, I just wish Servo had clearer goals. What is not clear about "parallelize all parts of the pipeline", "get rendering GPU bound", and "write a memory safe browser"? > Flexbox is a great example. We were told the problems with DOM updates was caused by the old layouts and things like floats. Nobody said that. > So Flexbox was supposed to fix those problems. No, it wasn't. > I find myself frustrated that now 8 years after the iPhone the web is still incapable of so many things. Me too. > Here's a very simple goal: A swipeable sidebar. You can do it already at 60 FPS. Make an overflow:scroll div and allow the user to scroll it into view. Or even just do it manually with the DOM. It will easily be 60 FPS in existing engines if you animate transforms. > That's it. Make that happen. Do whatever it takes. Create another new layout if necessary. Create a new touch spec that's faster, if necessary. Whatever. it. takes. And then when the work is done you can point to this new widget and say that the initiative paid off. There's nothing to do here, as you've described it. But your comment is actually illustrative of the real problem (at least, what I think it is). We have a ton of ways to do things on the Web. Some of them are fast, and some of them are not. Web developers don't realize what the fast paths are (which is not entirely their fault). I think that all of the paths should be fast, and I think that many of Servo's technologies (such as WebRender) go a long way toward making that happen. What's frustrating is comments like yours that describe things that the Web can clearly already do and blame browsers for supposedly being unable to do simple things. I used to think the way you did—that the Web is incapable of rendering a 60 FPS scrollable view—and then quickly discovered that, if optimized properly, there is actually no problem. What I think the problem with Web slowness is that Web authors don't know what the fast paths are, and they use things like jQuery.animate() that hit all the slow paths. That is a problem that I think we are well equipped to solve in Servo due to things like parallel style recalculation, off main thread layout, and WebRender, but it's a lot more nuanced than what you describe.

Touche 11y ago
> What is not clear about "parallelize layout" and "make better use of hardware"? The lack of a before/after demo. > No, it wasn't. What, specifically, were the performance goals then? > This is already done. Link?
- pcwalton 11y ago
  > The lack of a before/after demo. See the graphs here: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTgzNDA https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTgzNDA We also have various real-world performance demos showing that, for certain workloads, parallelism results in measurable FPS wins. I haven't wanted to get on stage and publicize them at this point, because it's early. But we do have them. > What, specifically, were the performance goals then? I wasn't involved with the design of flexbox, but I didn't see performance as the main goal. Rather, the goal was to make "springs and struts"-style UI layout easy to use, because simulating it in CSS2 had bad ergonomics. Performance wins, if anything, would be relative to doing all of the layout manually in JavaScript, not relative to the CSS2 primitives. Historically, relatively little attention has been paid to layout performance at all. The main performance wars have concerned DOM performance and JavaScript. (Look at what Dromaeo tests, for example.) > Link? I don't have time to create an actual demo for the specific thing you're asking for, but I've done many similar tests. Animating transforms will achieve 60FPS.
  - Touche 11y ago
    > See the graphs here: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTgzNDA https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTgzNDA That's not what I'm asking for. You're pointing to low-level metrics and I'm asking for high-level examples of things not achievable today that Servo will enable. > I don't have time to create an actual demo for the specific thing you're asking for, but I've done many similar tests. Animating transforms will achieve 60FPS. Understandable, well I know there are many such widgets on the web and I've never come across one that fits my requirements. Maybe they are all doing things as slowly as possible, but I doubt it.