sgbeal

33 ms·

571.
by sgbeal 4y ago
Is it just me or does the "examples" page show us absolutely nothing at all? Lots of screenshots, but none of them seem to actually show anything useful (especially the later ones).
572.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> ... as in a page request? Yup. > Why not just rerender to HTML on developer change? Because that's not how the Fossil SCM renders content. It has a cache, but only for certain high-CPU data like generation of zip files of the s
573.
by sgbeal 4y ago
FWIW, just a couple of weeks ago we started doing that for a new sqlite subproject: https://sqlite.org/wasm With the exception of one page, all of them are markdown, rendered on demand by the Fossil SCM. The one exception i
574.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> How did it happen? i was walking down the road doing something completely unrelated, not thinking about anything in particular, and it hit me. > Any suggestions to move towards that direction? If it doesn't happen on its own, i
575.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> I think Allan Watts has some interesting things to say on the topic. One example which comes to mind, from his "The Book": The man behind the microscope has this advice for you: instead of asking what it is just as "what
576.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> I think this is the kind of thing a fair amount of people here in HN have thought about, so I thought of asking. It would truly surprise me if many people _actively_ find their purpose, and it would surprise me almost as much if most p
577.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> How do you delete a file called -foo? rm ./-foo
578.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> Wouldn’t it make more sense to bundle a large amount of fonts with Google Chrome itself? Browser-specific features are what got the world in such a mess being tied to MSIE 6 for so long. i can't count how many times i heard "
579.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> I couldn't understand what is illegal from the article. See the link in the first sentence of the article and, if necessary, scroll down a bit to the "English Version" heading: < https://rewis.io/urteil
580.
by sgbeal 4y ago
Oh no! * WARNING: Deprecation! The following systems are deprecated in this release: - OS/2 (EMX) - AmigaOS - Xenix - Cray
581.
by sgbeal 4y ago
One of those things i never knew i needed until i saw it.
582.
Show HN: CSS minifier implemented in dependency-free C(fossil.wanderinghorse.net)
2 points by sgbeal 4y ago|0 comments
583.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> ... COOP is very strict for us You're not the only one :/. We suspect that the COOP/COEP requirement for OPFS will be outright untenable for many folks, in particular those using hosting which does not offer them the opt
584.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> There's literally three browser vendors, and of those, really only one of them needs to go "fuck it, sqlite now has an API" and the other two kind of don't have a lot of choice but to follow suit. It's a Chrome
585.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> ... although these topics could still potentially be mentioned in the documentation. They're not relevant to the wasm/js deliverables. They're an implementation detail of the server which happens to be serving the relate
586.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> The Web is not meant to be a property of Google. i'm not sure where you read in that that Google is owning this whole thing. They're just the first out the gate with working OPFS, so that's the implementation we worked a
587.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> Btw, I still see one problem of official SQLite solution — it requires COOP to use Only for the OPFS support, because any solution involving hiding an asynchronous API (OPFS) behind a synchronous one (sqlite) requires it because the &q
588.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> ... but this is something that's not on you: this is something that should have been on browser vendors to just _expose_ because every browser ships with sqlite baked in already. Richard (the sqlite lead) has often described his
589.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> You mind giving me an actual rundown on issues you've got with it instead of just slinging mud? Here's a log of one developer's anguish with IndexedDB... https://gist.github.com/pesterhazy/4de96193af
590.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> Who is "we" We is the sqlite team. i'm the "JS/WASM Guy" for the project. > and where I can see those benchmarks ? You can't currently because we don't have them in a user-consumable form. We&
591.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> I literally don't get why sqlite3, only, and specifically, still isn't usable by JS in 2022. It is now :). We provide 4 separate APIs, from the lowest-level 1-to-1 C-via-WASM bindings to one quite similar to sql.js, plus all
592.
by sgbeal 4y ago
>> > the project does not accept patches from people who have not submitted an affidavit dedicating their contribution into the public domain. > So your statement that SQLite "does NOT accept contributions" is plainly
593.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> localStorage suffers from issues like size limits and performance Absolutely, but _it works_ and nothing trumps working code ;). A slow and space-limited database is better than none at all! We implemented that functionality primarily
594.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> for the web , not for WASM. Docs have been updated. Thank you for the feedback! Edit: for future feedback (from anyone reading this) i can be reached via stephan at sqlite org. i'm unlikely to catch most doc feedback posted to HN
595.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> And will this SQLite file be portable (import and export to somewhere else) ? sqlite's storage format is independent of the underlying device. OPFS is "just another backend" and the only tricky part of implementing it wa
596.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> Key-value store would be OK, we (developers) can handle that. And in fact, we do it already. ... But I agree, handle relational data is what we want. You can now have both: a relational database in your key-value localStorage: < htt
597.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> Are there any numbers on performance? Tucked away in spreadsheets there are but we don't currently have any benchmarks in a publishable form. In broad strokes, i can assure you (as the one who performed the benchmarks) that the ne
598.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> I guess they are trying to do it slowly so they don't break stuff, but they're already doing things like removing FTS support. FWIW, i can say with some authority that they have been waiting on this new sqlite/wasm stuff
599.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> I wonder what the catalyst finally is/was to cause such an acceleration IMO, all that was missing was a truly compelling use case. The combination of the ubiquitous sqlite with non-trivially-sized persistent storage gives us that
600.
by sgbeal 4y ago
> Feels like WASM is hitting an inflection point this year. After nearly a decade of hearing "someday", that day is finally here. At the start of this development effort (April, IIRC (2022)) we (in the sqlite project) had only

More ›