rhabarba

45 ms·

541.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Ah, sorry - I usually use the beta versions, they seem to have had it earlier then.
542.
by rhabarba 9y ago
I wrote my own self-hosted cross-browser Xmarks alternative which happens to work on Vivaldi but is currently only tested on Firefox. Turns out cross-browser WebExtensions are not quite as easy as I thought. Alpha-state code and website: h
543.
by rhabarba 9y ago
The last big features missing from Firefox are tab tiles and the ability to "run" an executable download directly. The WebExtensions API does not allow either of them anymore.
544.
by rhabarba 9y ago
> I'd really like to see a description of the "Container Tab" concept https://www.ghacks.net/2016/06/15/firefox-container-tab/
545.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Whoa. Been using Vivaldi (as one of three main browsers) since the first Technical Preview - how come I haven't found that yet? Thank you!
546.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Firefox's "environments" are almost as lovely as Tab Groups though.
547.
by rhabarba 9y ago
> There was no warning There was, Chromefox had displayed them as "legacy" for a couple of months.
548.
Say hello to the world’s first blockchain smartphone(blog.streamr.com)
3 points by rhabarba 9y ago|0 comments
549.
Bitcoin is a scam(twitter.com)
5 points by rhabarba 9y ago|0 comments
550.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Because Emacs could do that before Atom's devs were even born.
551.
by rhabarba 9y ago
I consider it to be broken web design if a website requires JS to display text. I could live with a hard cut.
552.
by rhabarba 9y ago
I played a bit with WASM and I like its approach, but the one thing that annoys me most with web development is the limited number of client-side languages. WASM can be great if they allow it to.
553.
by rhabarba 9y ago
WebAssembly is not worth the effort unless it finally is supported by the LINK tag. Seriously, using JS to load a JS alternative is ridiculous.
554.
by rhabarba 9y ago
IMO, it sucks now. I like the awesome new speed even on my old Sandy Bridge, but the death of ANY possibilities to add features to the browser UI is not worth it. Really.
555.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Why not just improve Gopher?
556.
by rhabarba 9y ago
> I like x86 but it's not the cpu of the future unless it's open SPARC has been open for years FYI.
557.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Minimal config files are unwanted, I heard.
558.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Typical.
559.
by rhabarba 9y ago
(Chances are that those are about to be added anyway which would make me look dumb. But last time I checked, the VS team said they wouldn't do that.)
560.
by rhabarba 9y ago
There's always ed. (Which is surprisingly good.)
561.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Yes, that's why the assumption that it would be a subset is not quite true.
562.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Particularly, C11 threads. That's about everything for, at least, me. I know, windows.h has something similar, but I'd prefer to have standard features available.
563.
by rhabarba 9y ago
I find syntax highlighting to be quite distracting. There are reasons why it is still an option and not mandatory.
564.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Vi is not nvi either, by the way.
565.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Still, no C11. Subset of C++ my ass.
566.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Where can I sign a petition to let Javascript die before 2020?
567.
by rhabarba 9y ago
Does anyone actually use Elixir? If so: What makes it the right decision?
568.
by rhabarba 9y ago
I guess it wouldn't even exist if OllyDbg x64 would be a (non-alpha) thing. x64dbg provides a number of plugins in order to fill missing features to IDA/Olly: https://github.com/x64dbg/x64dbg/wiki/Pl
569.
by rhabarba 9y ago
And it has been integrated into the awesome x64dbg for quite a while. :)
570.
by rhabarba 9y ago
> performance, broad compatibility with websites and absolutely no tracking/analytics Pale Moon (not too cross-platform), qutebrowser (if you're fine with Webkit and keybindings).

More ›