3 ms·
Yeah I'm a software developer myself and I've been blown away by the progress in Ladybird. I didn't think it would be possible in the modern day and a complex w
by jug 3y ago
Yeah I'm a software developer myself and I've been blown away by the progress in Ladybird. I didn't think it would be possible in the modern day and a complex web. Most of it has just been built by the lead developer and a handful others. But maybe HTML5/WHATWG and a better "standards landscape" has actually helped, countering some past hurdles of "Designed for Netscape Navigator". We still have some issues but you can get very far by only rendering according to the standard. In fact, I think some browser sniffers on websites to "adapt" it does more harm than help. And you've got to do some pretty wonky stuff and ought to think twice about your design if you must do that stuff in 2023.
- rijoja 3y agoA chrome monoculture is hardly good for the software ecosystem, and I would like to encourage web-developers to test their webpages, apps and whatnot in ladybird, so that there is an actual libre-alternative! On the subject, would anyone now what if there is any selenium / Webdriver support, for Ladybird?
- rstat1 3y agoI believe it has some WebDriver support, but I'm not sure how complete it is.
- notpushkin 3y agoI think it's a little too early for that?
- pmarreck 3y agoheadless browser drivers are the devil. They are by far the slowest part of any test suite, they usually have to use hacks like setting up timers to wait (doing nothing and wasting precious dev time over and over again) while repeatedly checking for things like whether a dom element has finished setting up, and they run quite non-deterministically, resulting in random test fails, which are literally the worst. Not only is it too soon for that, it's too evil for that.
- rijoja 3y agoI bet that you can use webdrivers badly and or for evil, but then again isn't that true for any non-useless tool? Wouldn't it be helpful for the ladybird development team, to use to check for regressions? Apart from that, if Ladybird could be used in a test suite, wouldn't that be massively beneficial for it's adoption? My thinking is that if it became praxis among hard core open source fanatics to test their webpages thoroughly in ladybird, it would after a while more or less become "best practice" to do so, with said fanatics serving as "early adopters". What also speaks for this argument is that hard core open source fanatics, often go for simple and no-nonsense designs such as the very page we are using to discuss this on? I'm sure HN is perfectly usable in ladybird, even though I haven't checked it out myself!
- twh270 3y agoI've also been impressed by the progress in Ladybird. One point though is that there is an incredibly long tail of work in the major browsers related to OS-specific work, performance, browser-specific features, edge cases, legacy support, etc. I'm not saying Ladybird "needs to" have all this, just putting some of it into context. And it's no slight to the project either; they've managed to get a lot working with a paucity of person-hours.