3 ms·
> WebKit does not have hundreds of Apple assigned to it. Well, it's close to 100, according to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22059393 https://news.ycomb
by summerlight 7y ago
> WebKit does not have hundreds of Apple assigned to it.
Well, it's close to 100, according to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22059393 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22059393 ? You can bring up with other numbers to refute this.
> Not really.
Please don't assert this so lightly unless you have any evidence to support it. A rendering engine is just a tiny fraction and you gotta take care of literally thousands of other components to build a modern browser. This applies to Chrome, Firefox and even old good IE. I don't expect any valid reasons why the same logic cannot apply to Safari.
- saagarjha 7y agoThe number above is probably pretty close, but there's a misconception that WebKit is only a tiny fraction of Safari: it's not. Most of the manpower and work goes into it; Safari is just chrome around it (albeit chrome that does take a reasonable amount of work to make…just not as much as it does to support JavaScript and WebAssembly VMs, page styling, rendering, WebGL and WebGPU, networking, tracking prevention, and maintaining support for the the ever-growing list of web standards WebKit supports and participating in discussions on shaping them). Safari is just one of the clients of WebKit.