Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Update on Multi-Process Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 175 posts

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#161

Post by runeks »

dirkg wrote: post #83

So now Firefox will become much slower due to per tab process overhead, just like Chrome, will pollute the task list with processes, and lose the enormous benefits of it's fantastic extension model, all for some intangible security benefits? I've almost never had a security issue or crash on Firefox with a hundred tabs and maybe fifty extensions, it's still faster than chrome with 10 tabs.

I hope they chose a model of mapping a lot of virtual tab threads to a single OS thread, rather than one OS thread per tab, but I don't know.

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#162

Post by bzbarsky »

chrisper wrote: post #41
azakai wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, by common measurements Firefox's market share is more like 13.5% [1], not the 4% you mentioned. According to that link Firefox is the #2 browser, ahead of Microsoft and Apple's browsers. Second, Mozilla is a non-profit, so the incentives are different that the usual ones. Basically Mozilla wants to help the open web. A 13.5% browser can do that in many ways: drive new standards, provide an alternative t…

Thanks. That makes sense. I guess I just wasn't clear that Mozilla had unusual "non-capitalistic" goals.

The "non-capitalistic" goals are Mozilla's entire reason for existence.

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#163

Post by tptacek »

janfoeh wrote: post #94
JoshTriplett wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox Sync is cross-platform (it runs everywhere Firefox does), and it has every feature I want. What additional features do you want that it doesn't have?

Disclaimer: I'm writing this on Firefox. I was one of a couple of ten thousand people who donated money ten or so years ago for their famous NY Times ad when they were still going head-on against IE. I like them. This being said: if their Sync platform works for you, great. Here are my reasons why I choose 1Password as my password manager: 1. It's made by a company that focuses exclusively on this one product. It's t…

1. I'm not HN's resident crypto luminary. I'm HN's resident crypto loudmouth.

2. I endorse 1Password without reservation, but only the standalone version.

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#164

Post by [deleted] »

DonHopkins wrote: post #48
chrisper wrote: post #32

Does anyone know what the incentive behind the development of Firefox is at this point? Like, Chrome has such a huge browser market share, so why do they still develop Firefox? I assume it is not that feasible to invest time and money if the share is only 4%. I am just curious, and not trying to hate on Firefox. But I think most (?) non-tech people use Chrome. So maybe I am asking, what is the point of Firefox if the…

In the excellent Dr. Dobb's Journal interview "A Triumph of Simplicity: James Clark on Markup Languages and XML" [1], they ask him: DDJ: You're well known for writing very good reference implementations for SGML and XML Standards. How important is it for these reference implementations to be good implementations as opposed to just something that works? JC: Having a reference implementation that's too good can actuall…

[deleted]

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#165

Post by DonHopkins »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #151
DonHopkins wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the excellent Dr. Dobb's Journal interview "A Triumph of Simplicity: James Clark on Markup Languages and XML" [1], they ask him: DDJ: You're well known for writing very good reference implementations for SGML and XML Standards. How important is it for these reference implementations to be good implementations as opposed to just something that works? JC: Having a reference implementation that's too good can actuall…

Hey, thanks for the link; I didn't know it, believing I knew all SGML resources. (I'm the fool having actually implemented SGML -- no less -- in Javascript).

James Clark [1] has written some amazing stuff [2] [3]!

The story behind the design [4] of Relax/NG [5] [6] is fascinating and triumphant (thanks to simplicity). That July 2001 interview is apparently from before he merged his work on TREX [7] with Makoto Murata's [8] work on RELAX [9], working together on the OASIS RELAX NG technical committee [10].

Wikipedia: Makoto Murata: RELAX and RELAX NG [9]

Some people, including Murata and James Clark, had critical attitudes toward XML Schema. XML Schema is a modern XML schema language designed by W3C XML Schema Working Group. W3C intended XML Schema to supersede traditional DTD (Document Type Definition). XML Schema supports so many features that its specification is large and complex. Murata, James Clark and those who criticised XML Schema, pointed out the following:

It is difficult to implement all features of XML Schema.

It is difficult for engineers to read and write XML Schema definitions.

It does not permit nondeterministic content models.

Murata and collaborators designed another modern schema language, RELAX (Regular Language description for XML), more simple and mathematically consistent. They published RELAX specification in 2000. RELAX was approved as JIS and ISO/IEC standards. At roughly the same time, James Clark also designed another schema language, TREX (Tree Regular Expressions for XML).

Murata and James Clark designed a new schema language RELAX NG based on TREX and RELAX Core. RELAX NG syntax is the expansion of TREX. RELAX NG was approved by OASIS in December 2001. RELAX NG was also approved as Part 2 of ISO/IEC 19757: Document Schema Definition Languages (DSDL).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Clark_(programmer)

[2] http://www.jclark.com/

[3] http://www.jclark.com/xml/

[4] http://www.thaiopensource.com/relaxng/design.html

[5] http://relaxng.org/

[6] http://www.thaiopensource.com/relaxng/

[7] http://www.thaiopensource.com/trex/

[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makoto_Murata#RELAX_and_RELAX_...

[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Makoto_Murata

[10] https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/relax-ng/

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#166

Post by [deleted] »

bgwhn wrote: post #12
saberworks wrote: post #8

It would be really nice if the addons/extensions page showed which addons were listed as compatible and which weren't. I might thus make a decision to disable/delete an addon or two that were blocking me from using multiprocess firefox. As it is, I have no idea if my firefox is using multiprocess at all. All I know is that I use a lot of addons and I'm probably not, then, using multiprocess.

You can figure out what add-ons are compatible by cross-referencing http://www.arewee10syet.com/

[deleted]

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#167

Post by dang »

Phlarp wrote: post #49

This narrative white-washes over the part where he was witch-hunted out of a well deserved leadership position because he exercised his first amendment rights in a way that was unpopular with the greater tech community.

"Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13233433 and marked it off-topic.

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#168

Post by tannhaeuser »

DonHopkins wrote: post #165
tannhaeuser wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, thanks for the link; I didn't know it, believing I knew all SGML resources. (I'm the fool having actually implemented SGML -- no less -- in Javascript).

James Clark [1] has written some amazing stuff [2] [3]! The story behind the design [4] of Relax/NG [5] [6] is fascinating and triumphant (thanks to simplicity). That July 2001 interview is apparently from before he merged his work on TREX [7] with Makoto Murata's [8] work on RELAX [9], working together on the OASIS RELAX NG technical committee [10]. Wikipedia: Makoto Murata: RELAX and RELAX NG [9] Some people, inclu…

Yes, I know and appreciate RNG and James Clark of course.

However, for the web, like it or not, XML is a lost cause; yet the web is still the most important markup application by far.

In my project I'm trying to re-establish SGML (the good parts) for broad and practical web applications. SGML gives you HTML-style tag omission and empty elements, custom Wiki syntaxes eg. markdown plus markdown customizations, and injection-free templating, all based on an ISO standard.

I've just created a new SGML DTD with full coverage of W3C HTML5.1 [2]. As an outcome of this project, I also have been encouraged to push for a new SGML (ISO/IEC 8879) revision.

[1]: http://sgmljs.net/blog.html [2]: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/201611/msg00067.html

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#169

Post by hashhar »

Gonzih wrote: post #140
hashhar wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out VimFX. It is a very capable substitute.

How does it compare to Pentadactyl? I heavily use pendacatyl scripting functionality to do shelling out from firefox.

I can't say about Pentadactyl but I do think it is a good enough replacement for Vimperator. Sorry.

Re: Update on Multi-Process Firefox

#170

Post by dblohm7 »

hashhar wrote: post #139
dblohm7 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm the dev who is responsible for the Windows implementation. It has been quite the... gnarly experience to say the least. We were shooting for 52 for enabling a11y+e10s, but it is increasingly looking like we're going to need to slip to 53.

I would like to help out in any way I can. Where should I look to get an idea of the project and what do I need to know to be able to work on it?

Here are a couple of links that outline the design and contain some notes:

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis/Accessibility#Windows http://dblohm7.ca/blog/2016/04/06/new-team-new-project/

Note that the approach we are taking on Windows is different from the way that Chrome works. They cache the entire a11y tree in the parent process so that the DLLs injected by assistive technologies may quickly enumerate the a11y tree via virtual function calls.

In 2017 we want to start moving away from injected DLLs in Firefox. As part of that initiative I decided not to take the caching route in a11y as that would require continuing to allow injected DLLs for a11y purposes. Instead I am implementing a COM handler that should allow us to significantly reduce the number of round trips required to enumerate the tree. I am hoping that this will offer AT vendors a migration path that eventually moves them out of our process.

Feel free to join us in the #accessibility channel on Mozilla's IRC server to chat further. I am aklotz on that server.

Post reply on HN