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

SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 178 posts

Re: SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

#61

Post by yifanl »

hermitdev wrote: post #56
missblit wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your link also only gets 99/100 on modern browsers. Why? Well... // test 64: more attribute tests // attributes of the element var obj1 = document.createElement('object'); obj1.setAttribute('data', 'test.html'); // ... assert(obj1.data.match(/^http:/), "object.data isn't absolute"); See that "http" in test 64? Turns out you'll get a score of 100/100 if you use the http version of the URL instead of HTTPS.

Confirmed for me. Where's the metatest that tests Acid3?

Right here, it seems :)

Re: SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

#62

Post by [deleted] »

fabrice_d wrote: post #25
joeberon wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, SerenityOS is strictly C++

Which is both very impressive given everything that is being produced, but also a bit scary and sad in 2022. There is ample evidence that even very excellent developers and teams can't avoid the footguns of c++ and that leads issues down the line. If we just look at the browser, they seem to make much faster progress than Servo, but there is no doubt it will have security flaws.

[deleted]

Re: SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

#63

Post by somethingor »

fabrice_d wrote: post #42
skyfaller wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feels like this might be an example of "worse is better". Or alternately, that the community that SerenityOS has built and the joy they find in tinkering matters more than their technical foundations, in terms of getting something built that works and is maintained/maintainable. Servo looks like it could have been a technically better browser engine, but it seems the window for it becoming relevant is closing, while…

I agree with you about the project being a joy for the developers. But as a user, in no way I would rely on a browser started in 2020 written in c++ (or in zig, given other comments about its security characteristics). Keep in mind that gecko/webkit were written initially in c++ because c++ was the best language available at the time for these projects. This is not true anymore.

AFAIK SerenityOS has no interest in users, and instead targets developers exclusively.

Re: SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

#64

Post by akling »

kragen wrote: post #60

That's wonderful! How much RAM does it need? My biggest complaint about modern browsers is that I can't load a web page in less than 64 MiB, which is more than my entire computer had when I was running Netscape 3. The browsers are better now, but not in ways that necessarily use more memory.

We haven't really begun to optimize for memory usage yet, so it swings wildly depending on the content you're viewing.

At this stage, we're primarily focusing on correctness and compatibility, and performance is mostly a luxury. It's an area I look forward to eventually dealing with though, as it used to be my full-time job at Apple years ago and I have many fun ideas. :^)

Re: SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

#65

Post by samwillis »

greggsy wrote: post #49
TonyTrapp wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The old version ( http://acid3.acidtests.org/ ) will reach 97/100 on modern compliant browsers. There is a newer version ( https://wpt.live/acid/acid3/test.html ) which incorporates the changes made to the specs in the meantime, so modern browsers will reach 100/100 on this one again. The test was carried out against this version, as you can see in the address bar in the screenshot.

I got either 68, 97 or 99 on Safari iOS. Disabled content blockers and Darker Reader.

I was seeing the same untill I changed the urls to http rather than https as per another comment, then it gets 100.

Re: SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

#66

Post by akling »

loudmax wrote: post #41
rvz wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. It's beyond impressive, especially the web browser from scratch and the whole idea of operating systems that are not typical, yet another Linux distro stuff and having an integrated consistent user interface and open source like RedoxOS, Haiku, Fuchsia, etc has. But let's be a bit realistic, how long can we expect this to be a reliable daily driver on real machines and not stuck on a VM? It has taken more tha…

The challenge here would be getting all those miscellaneous hardware drivers to be ported to SerenityOS. Some hacker might write Serenity drivers for their particular desktop, but that won't do you any good unless you have the exact same hardware. A Raspberry Pi might be a good target, but Serenity OS is currently x86 only. So realistically, Serenity on random consumer hardware is unlikely to ever happen. Fuchsia is…

> I don't know that making SerenityOS a daily driver for anyone who isn't interested in hacking on it is an actual goal for Andreas.

My main goal is to make a system for myself to use. I'm not particularly interested in working on stuff that doesn't affect my own use cases.

However, SerenityOS is not a one-man project. There are hundreds of other developers, all with their own individual goals, each putting their time and effort into making the system into something they would like to see as well.

I have no idea what will come out of this in the long run, but it's the most fun I've ever had, so I'm just gonna keep going and see what happens. :^)

Re: SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

#68

Post by speedgoose »

greggsy wrote: post #49
TonyTrapp wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The old version ( http://acid3.acidtests.org/ ) will reach 97/100 on modern compliant browsers. There is a newer version ( https://wpt.live/acid/acid3/test.html ) which incorporates the changes made to the specs in the meantime, so modern browsers will reach 100/100 on this one again. The test was carried out against this version, as you can see in the address bar in the screenshot.

I got either 68, 97 or 99 on Safari iOS. Disabled content blockers and Darker Reader.

The animation is far from being fluid too.

Re: SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

#69

Post by kragen »

akling wrote: post #64
kragen wrote: post #60

That's wonderful! How much RAM does it need? My biggest complaint about modern browsers is that I can't load a web page in less than 64 MiB, which is more than my entire computer had when I was running Netscape 3. The browsers are better now, but not in ways that necessarily use more memory.

We haven't really begun to optimize for memory usage yet, so it swings wildly depending on the content you're viewing. At this stage, we're primarily focusing on correctness and compatibility, and performance is mostly a luxury. It's an area I look forward to eventually dealing with though, as it used to be my full-time job at Apple years ago and I have many fun ideas. :^)

What's a rough minimum for a page with some text on it? Are we talking about 64MiB like Chromium, WebKit, or Gecko, or more like 16KiB, 256KiB, 4MiB, or 1 GiB?

I think of memory usage as being more about correctness than performance, though I know that isn't how most people see it. Trying to run a 512MiB process on a 64MiB computer, or a 512GiB process on a 64GiB computer, is just never going to run at a usable speed. Broken software is the limit as latency approaches infinity.

Moreover, I've never seen someone take software that needed 1 GiB to run and modify it incrementally into software that could run in 1 MiB, though I have seen the opposite.

Re: SerenityOS Browser now passes the Acid3 test

#70

Post by jug »

Tomte wrote: post #26

It's a great achievement! But note that it doesn't mean that the browser interprets modern CSS correctly. Wikipedia's Acid3 page says: > By April 2017, the updated specifications had diverged from the test such that the latest versions of Google Chrome, Safari and Mozilla Firefox no longer pass the test as written. Hickson acknowledges that some aspects of the test were controversial and has written that the test "no…

IIRC it's something about timings that makes it fluctuate. At 97+ or so a browser can in fact be compliant insofar as the test goes.
Post reply on HN