3 ms·

It's "just a browser" in the same sense that the Linux kernel and GNU are "just an operating system". It's one of the most complex pieces of software - perhaps

It's "just a browser" in the same sense that the Linux kernel and GNU are "just an operating system". It's one of the most complex pieces of software - perhaps even human designed systems - ever to exist and we're using it to render a few polygons and drop shadows because the C++ committee made a bunch of mistakes decades ago so now our webdevs are mortally afraid of CMake and Qt/QML. Or GTK. Or whatever. Pretty much the only people that seem to put out native GUI tools in any significant quantity are Apple developers. The tradeoffs that Blink and V8 engineers have made to support the entirety of the internet and the morass of web development precludes efficient use of resources for simpler purposes, like rendering an animation. After all, there a billion React hooks and ad tracking scripts to optimize, otherwise bounce rates will increase.

robocat 2y ago
> precludes efficient use of resources for simpler purposes Strong disagree. If it were an animated gif then the browser will be astonishingly efficient because of crazy good optimisations. The underlying reason is that developers are limited to the techniques/toolbox they know. The performance costs are unpredictable because of: (1) the declarative style (using imperative solutions would have other costs), (2) debugging browser performance regressions is difficult (SQL EXPLAIN is more learnable). Browsers enable developers. I could design that animation in CSS even though I'm a developer, plus I understand the article fully. I couldn't design an animated gif because I am totally unfamiliar with any tools for achieving that. I think the Blink and V8 teams do an exceptionally good job when choosing compromises. HTML/CSS/SVG/JS and Chromium are winning the UI wars because they deliver practical and efficient enough solutions. Other UI solutions I have experienced all have other downsides. Browsers are magical. I mostly really agree with your comment.

robocat 2y ago

> precludes efficient use of resources for simpler purposes Strong disagree. If it were an animated gif then the browser will be astonishingly efficient because of crazy good optimisations. The underlying reason is that developers are limited to the techniques/toolbox they know. The performance costs are unpredictable because of: (1) the declarative style (using imperative solutions would have other costs), (2) debugging browser performance regressions is difficult (SQL EXPLAIN is more learnable). Browsers enable developers. I could design that animation in CSS even though I'm a developer, plus I understand the article fully. I couldn't design an animated gif because I am totally unfamiliar with any tools for achieving that. I think the Blink and V8 teams do an exceptionally good job when choosing compromises. HTML/CSS/SVG/JS and Chromium are winning the UI wars because they deliver practical and efficient enough solutions. Other UI solutions I have experienced all have other downsides. Browsers are magical. I mostly really agree with your comment.