15 ms·

V8 Release v8.6

74 points by theBashShell 6y ago

echelon 6y ago
I've gotten to the point I hate reading about any updates to Chrome. It's a monoculture, and Google are serving themselves. This release has some really cool WASM stuff, but at the same time this post hit the front page, it sits beside other posts about Mozilla shuttering projects. The DOJ needs to bar Google from having a browser or any say in browser technology. These people are ruining our web. Google is slowly turning the web into WeChat. It's horrifying to watch it unfold. Approved bundles, no URLs, everything hosted on AMP, and deeply embedded ads. We're about to lose one of the most free and democratic technologies forever. All so that Google can enrich itself.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Chrome didn't got there alone, the Electron packagers, nodejs, ChromeOS buyers, IE haters, FF dev tools bashing,...
  - echelon 6y ago
    Electron and Node have nothing to do with this trend. This anti-competitive behavior of embrace, extend, extinguish comes straight from the top.
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      Sure it does, it spreads Chrome adoption.
- ng12 6y ago
  The web survived MSFT, what's different about Google?
  - agentdrtran 6y ago
    did it survive if it led to another (albeit different) monoculture?
    - robertlagrant 6y ago
      Yes. Microsoft wasn't automatically bad for the web because they were dominant. They were bad because they were a closed process, and soon after they won the browser wars they closed the Internet Explorer team, allowing no further progress to be made. Without the Mozilla team creating a credible, Windows-based rival, and subsequently Google creating Chrome, the Web would look really different today.
  - jjice 6y ago
    Not OP, but the web is a much larger platform that it was when Microsoft ruled it.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Nope, it just changed landlord.
- taf2 6y ago
  Can you name 1 or 2 SaaS applications that have not benefited?
- VikingCoder 6y ago
  I want to create a web page. You want to view it. I'm sorry, but how exactly is anything in Chrome stopping that?
  - ludocode 6y ago
    Sure, if you want to make a simple personal web page, it will probably work in other browsers. Meanwhile we have government and banking websites that say "This browser is unsupported" when viewed with any browser other than Chrome. These are essential services forcing us to consolidate under Google. Many websites break as Firefox and Safari add new privacy protections. The websites don't care: if they can't track you then they often don't want you viewing their content anyway. In some cases they'd rather things break so that Mozilla and Apple reconsider their efforts toward privacy. The other comment mentions that we survived MSFT, so everything will be fine. This is naive. When IE6 had a monopoly Microsoft let it stagnate. The web basically didn't change for ten years; sure there were new standards but nobody could use them because they wouldn't work in IE6. It also wasn't nearly as complicated as it is today, so it was possible for other browsers to catch up. Google today is doing the opposite. They are steering the web in all sorts of new directions massively increasing its complexity, and they are forcing automatic updates everywhere to make sure IE6 doesn't happen. All of this means it's next to impossible for other browser vendors to keep up. Microsoft has already given up and adopted Blink. How long do you think Apple will hold out? How long do you think Google will keep bankrolling Mozilla?
    - greggman3 6y ago
      >All of this means it's next to impossible for other browser vendors to keep up So your solution seems to be hobble the successful company so the weaker companies can compete? Maybe we should also prevent strong athletes from using their strengths and skills because other people don't have the same strengths and skills? Should we prevent smart people from using the brains because some people's brains don't function as well? Maybe there's a different argument against Chrome but Google adding features to the Chrome is certainly not an argument against Chrome.
      - 6y ago
benatkin 6y ago
Another reminder to check out WebAssembly. Both updates in the release notes about WebAssembly sound very promising. One is getting towards complete parity with native code, and the other is reduced overhead when interfacing with JS. I looked around the web and found this: https://github.com/appcypher/awesome-wasm-langs https://github.com/appcypher/awesome-wasm-langs ...which led me to this: https://github.com/AssemblyScript/assemblyscript https://github.com/AssemblyScript/assemblyscript Its description is awesome: "Definitely not a TypeScript to WebAssembly compiler :rocket:" The thing that makes me most not want to miss the boat on WebAssembly so far is that Figma uses it (with C++): https://madewithwebassembly.com/showcase/figma/ https://madewithwebassembly.com/showcase/figma/
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Flash is slowly back. https://platform.uno/ https://platform.uno/ https://www.leaningtech.com/pages/cheerpx.html https://www.leaningtech.com/pages/cheerpx.html
- rvz 6y ago
  > Another reminder to check out WebAssembly. Right. The actual reason you see all the big companies loving WebAssembly is that now you can fully have cross-platform black-box DRM binaries running on every browser. But of course what could possibly go wrong? It is another Adobe® Flash® that is controlled by the big tech companies rather than just one.
  - untog 6y ago
    We already have black box DRM binaries in browsers. That battle is lost. WebAssembly is not another Flash. It might allow someone to create something that resembles Flash, but WebAssembly itself is not. You might as well criticise C because people can write DRM with it.
    - tgragnato 6y ago
      Isn’t EME limited to media sources? WebAssembly is not. It’s not a tiny difference, and skepticism is not necessarily unfounded.
devwastaken 6y ago
Treating any context of master slave as being discriminatory or "disrespectful", is discriminatory to consensual BDSM and continues the trend of suppressing and attacking that minority group.
- kcolford 6y ago
  Wow, what a twist. I'd say that doesn't really apply though because not only is consensual BDSM invisible as a minority classification, it actively tries to remain hidden in public. It is inappropriate to display such things to people who haven't consented to being shown them. That's why you don't wear a gimp suit to go grocery shopping, the other patrons haven't consented to being part of that scene. So if anything someone who engages in BDSM would be very much offended see master/slave used casually in a public setting.
  - hevelvarik 6y ago
    This is the most patient comment I’ve ever seen and I applaud you for it!
    - xscott 6y ago
      Patient or not, it isn't true. Even in a small semi-rural town, I saw a dominant/submissive family at the grocery store where one of them wore pretty revealing clothing with a t-shirt that said she was "collared and loved". To me, they looked like a very happy, if unconventional, couple. >> It is inappropriate to display such things [...] Heh, "inappropriate" is such a slippery word.
  - devwastaken 6y ago
    You're displaying the words BDSM in public on this very forum to people who haven't consented to it. That's innapropriate and we have to create a policy that respects those who don't want to see that. ~My point is when you take entire words, regardless of their context and outlaw them you're inherently suppressing that words representation of groups that use it in different contexts. There is no reason to wholey remove the terms master and slave unless the words are wholey wrong to use, which would then mean that BDSM surely is as well. Either you take all of it as being wrong or accept that words have context.
The_rationalist 6y ago
So we’ve worked with our friends at Microsoft There is beauty in collaboration
eloff 6y ago
When did words become forbidden? I heard recently that someone lost their job because the used the N word in a purely illustrative manner, of words that are forbidden, not as an insult. I think it was a Netflix exec, but I may be mistaken. edit yes it was: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44585072 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44585072 I don't understand how the words master or slave are offensive to anyone in a computer context. People need to grow the fuck up and stop getting so butt hurt over stupid little words and microagressions. There are real problems out there in the world, go find one and do something about it and stop being a little bitch cry baby.
- summitsummit 6y ago
  > There are real problems out there in the world, go find one and do something about it and stop being a little bitch cry baby. it's all about posturing and signaling, and being a crook. yes, there are real problems that stem from corporations and society's heavy efforts to divide and capitalize on us. however, it's far more difficult and low-roi to actually fight racism or do anything productive, whereas you get most of the benefits by acting like you care and banning a couple words and saying it's bad!
  - eloff 6y ago
    I agree, it seems to be all about virtue signaling as opposed to trying to do anything actually transformative.
    - rvz 6y ago
      Exactly. It is virtue signalling at its finest and it does absolutely nothing to address the actual concern or create anything substantiative. > The v8.6 version makes the V8 code base more respectful. The team joined a Chromium-wide effort to follow Google’s commitments to racial equity by replacing some insensitive terms in the project. The 'decisions' of the Chromium team never cease to be so illogical. If they complain about upstreaming another OS like the BSDs (Because they're a minority of users and its vewy vewy 'hard' to maintain) [0] but happily rename words in the entire Chromium codebase to appeal to a minority of actually 'offended' people of the sake of so-called 'inclusivity', then I'm afraid they have just defied any sense of logic and reason. This is the hill they want to die on. > This is still an ongoing effort and any external contributor is welcome to give a hand! You can see the list of still available tasks here. An ongoing senseless wasted effort. [0] https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/chromium-dev/b57hDs8yE4g/5tXefZ74AQAJ https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/chromium-dev/...

74 points by theBashShell 6y ago

I've gotten to the point I hate reading about any updates to Chrome. It's a monoculture, and Google are serving themselves. This release has some really cool WASM stuff, but at the same time this post hit the front page, it sits beside other posts about Mozilla shuttering projects. The DOJ needs to bar Google from having a browser or any say in browser technology. These people are ruining our web. Google is slowly turning the web into WeChat. It's horrifying to watch it unfold. Approved bundles, no URLs, everything hosted on AMP, and deeply embedded ads. We're about to lose one of the most free and democratic technologies forever. All so that Google can enrich itself.

pjmlp 6y ago
Chrome didn't got there alone, the Electron packagers, nodejs, ChromeOS buyers, IE haters, FF dev tools bashing,...
- echelon 6y ago
  Electron and Node have nothing to do with this trend. This anti-competitive behavior of embrace, extend, extinguish comes straight from the top.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Sure it does, it spreads Chrome adoption.
ng12 6y ago
The web survived MSFT, what's different about Google?
- agentdrtran 6y ago
  did it survive if it led to another (albeit different) monoculture?
  - robertlagrant 6y ago
    Yes. Microsoft wasn't automatically bad for the web because they were dominant. They were bad because they were a closed process, and soon after they won the browser wars they closed the Internet Explorer team, allowing no further progress to be made. Without the Mozilla team creating a credible, Windows-based rival, and subsequently Google creating Chrome, the Web would look really different today.
- jjice 6y ago
  Not OP, but the web is a much larger platform that it was when Microsoft ruled it.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Nope, it just changed landlord.
taf2 6y ago
Can you name 1 or 2 SaaS applications that have not benefited?
VikingCoder 6y ago
I want to create a web page. You want to view it. I'm sorry, but how exactly is anything in Chrome stopping that?
- ludocode 6y ago
  Sure, if you want to make a simple personal web page, it will probably work in other browsers. Meanwhile we have government and banking websites that say "This browser is unsupported" when viewed with any browser other than Chrome. These are essential services forcing us to consolidate under Google. Many websites break as Firefox and Safari add new privacy protections. The websites don't care: if they can't track you then they often don't want you viewing their content anyway. In some cases they'd rather things break so that Mozilla and Apple reconsider their efforts toward privacy. The other comment mentions that we survived MSFT, so everything will be fine. This is naive. When IE6 had a monopoly Microsoft let it stagnate. The web basically didn't change for ten years; sure there were new standards but nobody could use them because they wouldn't work in IE6. It also wasn't nearly as complicated as it is today, so it was possible for other browsers to catch up. Google today is doing the opposite. They are steering the web in all sorts of new directions massively increasing its complexity, and they are forcing automatic updates everywhere to make sure IE6 doesn't happen. All of this means it's next to impossible for other browser vendors to keep up. Microsoft has already given up and adopted Blink. How long do you think Apple will hold out? How long do you think Google will keep bankrolling Mozilla?
  - greggman3 6y ago
    >All of this means it's next to impossible for other browser vendors to keep up So your solution seems to be hobble the successful company so the weaker companies can compete? Maybe we should also prevent strong athletes from using their strengths and skills because other people don't have the same strengths and skills? Should we prevent smart people from using the brains because some people's brains don't function as well? Maybe there's a different argument against Chrome but Google adding features to the Chrome is certainly not an argument against Chrome.
    - 6y ago

benatkin 6y ago

Another reminder to check out WebAssembly. Both updates in the release notes about WebAssembly sound very promising. One is getting towards complete parity with native code, and the other is reduced overhead when interfacing with JS. I looked around the web and found this: https://github.com/appcypher/awesome-wasm-langs https://github.com/appcypher/awesome-wasm-langs ...which led me to this: https://github.com/AssemblyScript/assemblyscript https://github.com/AssemblyScript/assemblyscript Its description is awesome: "Definitely not a TypeScript to WebAssembly compiler :rocket:" The thing that makes me most not want to miss the boat on WebAssembly so far is that Figma uses it (with C++): https://madewithwebassembly.com/showcase/figma/ https://madewithwebassembly.com/showcase/figma/

pjmlp 6y ago
Flash is slowly back. https://platform.uno/ https://platform.uno/ https://www.leaningtech.com/pages/cheerpx.html https://www.leaningtech.com/pages/cheerpx.html
rvz 6y ago
> Another reminder to check out WebAssembly. Right. The actual reason you see all the big companies loving WebAssembly is that now you can fully have cross-platform black-box DRM binaries running on every browser. But of course what could possibly go wrong? It is another Adobe® Flash® that is controlled by the big tech companies rather than just one.
- untog 6y ago
  We already have black box DRM binaries in browsers. That battle is lost. WebAssembly is not another Flash. It might allow someone to create something that resembles Flash, but WebAssembly itself is not. You might as well criticise C because people can write DRM with it.
  - tgragnato 6y ago
    Isn’t EME limited to media sources? WebAssembly is not. It’s not a tiny difference, and skepticism is not necessarily unfounded.

devwastaken 6y ago

Treating any context of master slave as being discriminatory or "disrespectful", is discriminatory to consensual BDSM and continues the trend of suppressing and attacking that minority group.

kcolford 6y ago
Wow, what a twist. I'd say that doesn't really apply though because not only is consensual BDSM invisible as a minority classification, it actively tries to remain hidden in public. It is inappropriate to display such things to people who haven't consented to being shown them. That's why you don't wear a gimp suit to go grocery shopping, the other patrons haven't consented to being part of that scene. So if anything someone who engages in BDSM would be very much offended see master/slave used casually in a public setting.
- hevelvarik 6y ago
  This is the most patient comment I’ve ever seen and I applaud you for it!
  - xscott 6y ago
    Patient or not, it isn't true. Even in a small semi-rural town, I saw a dominant/submissive family at the grocery store where one of them wore pretty revealing clothing with a t-shirt that said she was "collared and loved". To me, they looked like a very happy, if unconventional, couple. >> It is inappropriate to display such things [...] Heh, "inappropriate" is such a slippery word.
- devwastaken 6y ago
  You're displaying the words BDSM in public on this very forum to people who haven't consented to it. That's innapropriate and we have to create a policy that respects those who don't want to see that. ~My point is when you take entire words, regardless of their context and outlaw them you're inherently suppressing that words representation of groups that use it in different contexts. There is no reason to wholey remove the terms master and slave unless the words are wholey wrong to use, which would then mean that BDSM surely is as well. Either you take all of it as being wrong or accept that words have context.

The_rationalist 6y ago

So we’ve worked with our friends at Microsoft There is beauty in collaboration

eloff 6y ago

When did words become forbidden? I heard recently that someone lost their job because the used the N word in a purely illustrative manner, of words that are forbidden, not as an insult. I think it was a Netflix exec, but I may be mistaken. edit yes it was: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44585072 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-44585072 I don't understand how the words master or slave are offensive to anyone in a computer context. People need to grow the fuck up and stop getting so butt hurt over stupid little words and microagressions. There are real problems out there in the world, go find one and do something about it and stop being a little bitch cry baby.

summitsummit 6y ago
> There are real problems out there in the world, go find one and do something about it and stop being a little bitch cry baby. it's all about posturing and signaling, and being a crook. yes, there are real problems that stem from corporations and society's heavy efforts to divide and capitalize on us. however, it's far more difficult and low-roi to actually fight racism or do anything productive, whereas you get most of the benefits by acting like you care and banning a couple words and saying it's bad!
- eloff 6y ago
  I agree, it seems to be all about virtue signaling as opposed to trying to do anything actually transformative.
  - rvz 6y ago
    Exactly. It is virtue signalling at its finest and it does absolutely nothing to address the actual concern or create anything substantiative. > The v8.6 version makes the V8 code base more respectful. The team joined a Chromium-wide effort to follow Google’s commitments to racial equity by replacing some insensitive terms in the project. The 'decisions' of the Chromium team never cease to be so illogical. If they complain about upstreaming another OS like the BSDs (Because they're a minority of users and its vewy vewy 'hard' to maintain) [0] but happily rename words in the entire Chromium codebase to appeal to a minority of actually 'offended' people of the sake of so-called 'inclusivity', then I'm afraid they have just defied any sense of logic and reason. This is the hill they want to die on. > This is still an ongoing effort and any external contributor is welcome to give a hand! You can see the list of still available tasks here. An ongoing senseless wasted effort. [0] https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/chromium-dev/b57hDs8yE4g/5tXefZ74AQAJ https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/chromium-dev/...