7 ms·

Nightmare level: code should be compatible with both IE6 and Firefox 50

by pvdebbe 10y ago

egeozcan 10y ago
Like doing the impossible? Create a responsive layout with 3 sections (header, content, sidebar) that will look exactly the same in the given browsers (at the same resolution) while still looking great on mobile, without any JavaScript or even server-side feature detection. Bonus points for minimal number of CSS hacks. Seriously, remembering the stuff I had to deal with, in today's world of the "modern browsers", I feel like I changed my profession completely. In other words, I'm afraid that me from 10 years ago wouldn't be able to understand so much from the front-end code I write these days and I'm also not sure about the vice versa. The opposite are, although that I don't enjoy the language too much, my Java projects which feel like they are immortal. I wonder if and when JavaScript will be that mature.
- mikekchar 10y ago
  Not really an apples to apples comparison. With JS and the browser, you are distributing the runtime libraries separately from the application. Imagine having to write a GUI app in Java that would work with every JRE version. The other thing is that Sun owned the standard. So even if you were IBM and were making your own runtime environment, you couldn't call it Java unless Sun agreed. Imagine if you had multiple vendors supplying a JRE and several of them were intentionally breaking their versions to lock users into their implementation. Lately the browser vendors have started to work a little bit better with each other, but I doubt it will ever be like Java.
  - egeozcan 10y ago
    Yes, you are right. I wasn't complaining though, as I understand the reason behind the current state of things. It was more of a wish, to be clear. However, in the end, we are still getting something close to Java with Web Assembly (Stable byte-code-like platform and potentially many languages targeting it).
  - pvg 10y ago
    Imagine having to write a GUI app in Java that would work with every JRE version. You don't have to imagine. Just tried it: http://i.imgur.com/zBNkKTu.png http://i.imgur.com/zBNkKTu.png Netscape IFC, 1996-1997 vintage. Compiles and runs like a champ on JDK 8, current OS X. Just like it did on JDK 1.
- lojack 10y ago
  I could do it if there was reasonable limits on the viewport size of IE browsers. For instance, if the IE6 window will always be at least 1024px wide. Once you need to give IE6 responsiveness, the only way I could imagine doing it would rely almost exclusively on CSS hacks.
opvasger 10y ago
Applied tool - Babel?
userbinator 10y ago
That reminds me of how the demoscene has a JavaScript demo category now, which usually targets the latest browser(s) with all the new JS features. It also has the usual native demos on the latest PC, and retro demos on platforms like the Atari, C64, and ZX Spectrum. Perhaps it should also have a "retro browser" category for IE6, Firefox 2.x, and the like. ...but I feel that someone would just find an exploit in JS, break out of the sandbox, and use that to run a native demo instead.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- skrebbel 10y ago
  the common demoscene platforms and filesize limits bring limits that make the coding fun, exciting, challenging. IE6 seems to me like an arbitrary limit that just makes life horrible without much gain. i don't think sceners are going to target retro browsers soon.
  - pvdebbe 10y ago
    ...or if they do target something retro, maybe Netscape Navigator or similar icon. IE6 is maybe infamous, not very nostalgic in any way.
- tripzilch 10y ago
  the retro categories are because sceners also enjoyed and used to code demos for the C64 and Amiga platforms when they were popular back in the day. While you could do some funky stuff with IE6 JS, you also couldn't really do anything. Don't forget how utterly slow JS was back then, not because the computers were slower, but because it was interpreted and run token-by-token in a very inefficient manner. This, and nobody took it seriously then as a language to write actual applications in. If a scener had to do something splashy in the browser, they'd go for Flash (and still groan about its lack of performance). If you told someone back then about "asm.js", they'd think you were making a joke, and a pretty funny one at that (like if you told them Microsoft would become a platinum member of the Linux Foundation kind of joke back then). > ...but I feel that someone would just find an exploit in JS, break out of the sandbox, and use that to run a native demo instead. Well, there's rules. There always have been rules. You can't read out default icons, themes, desktop background images from the system folder to obtain some nice stock graphics for use in a 4096 byte demo, either. If your entry hacks the compo machine and doesn't do it with an extreme amount of grace and style, expect to be booed off stage. With sufficient style and awesomeness, you might just get disqualified :)
shakna 10y ago
cry On a website I maintain, almost 70% of users use IE7. We tried to get them to update, but no results.

Nightmare level: code should be compatible with both IE6 and Firefox 50

by pvdebbe 10y ago

Nightmare level: code should be compatible with both IE6 and Firefox 50

Like doing the impossible? Create a responsive layout with 3 sections (header, content, sidebar) that will look exactly the same in the given browsers (at the same resolution) while still looking great on mobile, without any JavaScript or even server-side feature detection. Bonus points for minimal number of CSS hacks. Seriously, remembering the stuff I had to deal with, in today's world of the "modern browsers", I feel like I changed my profession completely. In other words, I'm afraid that me from 10 years ago wouldn't be able to understand so much from the front-end code I write these days and I'm also not sure about the vice versa. The opposite are, although that I don't enjoy the language too much, my Java projects which feel like they are immortal. I wonder if and when JavaScript will be that mature.

mikekchar 10y ago
Not really an apples to apples comparison. With JS and the browser, you are distributing the runtime libraries separately from the application. Imagine having to write a GUI app in Java that would work with every JRE version. The other thing is that Sun owned the standard. So even if you were IBM and were making your own runtime environment, you couldn't call it Java unless Sun agreed. Imagine if you had multiple vendors supplying a JRE and several of them were intentionally breaking their versions to lock users into their implementation. Lately the browser vendors have started to work a little bit better with each other, but I doubt it will ever be like Java.
- egeozcan 10y ago
  Yes, you are right. I wasn't complaining though, as I understand the reason behind the current state of things. It was more of a wish, to be clear. However, in the end, we are still getting something close to Java with Web Assembly (Stable byte-code-like platform and potentially many languages targeting it).
- pvg 10y ago
  Imagine having to write a GUI app in Java that would work with every JRE version. You don't have to imagine. Just tried it: http://i.imgur.com/zBNkKTu.png http://i.imgur.com/zBNkKTu.png Netscape IFC, 1996-1997 vintage. Compiles and runs like a champ on JDK 8, current OS X. Just like it did on JDK 1.
lojack 10y ago
I could do it if there was reasonable limits on the viewport size of IE browsers. For instance, if the IE6 window will always be at least 1024px wide. Once you need to give IE6 responsiveness, the only way I could imagine doing it would rely almost exclusively on CSS hacks.

opvasger 10y ago

Applied tool - Babel?

userbinator 10y ago

That reminds me of how the demoscene has a JavaScript demo category now, which usually targets the latest browser(s) with all the new JS features. It also has the usual native demos on the latest PC, and retro demos on platforms like the Atari, C64, and ZX Spectrum. Perhaps it should also have a "retro browser" category for IE6, Firefox 2.x, and the like. ...but I feel that someone would just find an exploit in JS, break out of the sandbox, and use that to run a native demo instead.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
skrebbel 10y ago
the common demoscene platforms and filesize limits bring limits that make the coding fun, exciting, challenging. IE6 seems to me like an arbitrary limit that just makes life horrible without much gain. i don't think sceners are going to target retro browsers soon.
- pvdebbe 10y ago
  ...or if they do target something retro, maybe Netscape Navigator or similar icon. IE6 is maybe infamous, not very nostalgic in any way.
tripzilch 10y ago
the retro categories are because sceners also enjoyed and used to code demos for the C64 and Amiga platforms when they were popular back in the day. While you could do some funky stuff with IE6 JS, you also couldn't really do anything. Don't forget how utterly slow JS was back then, not because the computers were slower, but because it was interpreted and run token-by-token in a very inefficient manner. This, and nobody took it seriously then as a language to write actual applications in. If a scener had to do something splashy in the browser, they'd go for Flash (and still groan about its lack of performance). If you told someone back then about "asm.js", they'd think you were making a joke, and a pretty funny one at that (like if you told them Microsoft would become a platinum member of the Linux Foundation kind of joke back then). > ...but I feel that someone would just find an exploit in JS, break out of the sandbox, and use that to run a native demo instead. Well, there's rules. There always have been rules. You can't read out default icons, themes, desktop background images from the system folder to obtain some nice stock graphics for use in a 4096 byte demo, either. If your entry hacks the compo machine and doesn't do it with an extreme amount of grace and style, expect to be booed off stage. With sufficient style and awesomeness, you might just get disqualified :)

shakna 10y ago

cry On a website I maintain, almost 70% of users use IE7. We tried to get them to update, but no results.