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

Ladybird browser spreads its wings

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 319 posts

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#91

Post by 1GZ0 »

amelius wrote: post #63

If they want adoption, maybe a good idea to build a hybrid ladybird/firefox browser, where, if some page does not render well in ladybird, the user can switch to firefox based rendering with a simple mouse click.

What would be the point of writing a whole new browser engine from scratch if you're just gonna fall back on a different one? Ladybird isn't ready and likely won't be for a long time. Treat this more like a "we're working on a new browser" type announcement, not a "We're launching a new browser today" announcement.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#92

Post by pjmlp »

voidwtf wrote: post #35

I don't want to discourage the developers working on this project, but I'm curious why we're still writing applications that will almost certainly execute or process hostile content in languages that don't maintain strict memory safe contract? Have we not learned our lesson yet, or am I misunderstanding the situation? I believe it was a Microsoft study that linked unsafe memory access to ~70% of exploit chains.

Note that despite that study, Windows and XBox teams are quite found of their C and C++, and even their own .NET has more success on the Azure side, than replacing all those COM/WinRT C++ workloads, and extension points.

It is Azure that is more keen in adopting memory safe languages, and has the mandate that new systems code should be done using them.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#93

Post by flohofwoe »

sprash wrote: post #42

As long as they don't get rid of the Qt dependency the project is a bit pointless. If you are using Qt anyways Qt Webview offers already a superior way to render HTML than Ladybird.

Qt webview is just Chromium in a trenchcoat. The point is to create a new browser engine, not a new Chromium UI (and hopefully much less bloated than Chromium).

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#94

Post by samiv »

I'm already speculating that sooner or later in the future this project will end up pivoting to chromium as the underlying engine.

I can think of two reasons for this

- money is involved and someone buys them out / influences the direction of the project

- the reality of the task ahead sets in the and the dev team gives up on custom engine development

For those of you coming back to this comment from the future, yep "told you so". ;-)

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#95

Post by 1GZ0 »

7bit wrote: post #18
ironmagma wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having looked at the source code… it’s not close. Not even 1/20 of the way there IMO. But it might not need to be. It’s nice just having a second system. I don’t know to what extent Ladybird can replace Chrome, but the issues that come with a monoculture are known. There’s probably at least some hope that Ladybird could take off once it reaches a critical mass.

It will never reach critical mass.

It might not, but so what? Don't we deserve options?

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#96

Post by asddubs »

skywal_l wrote: post #62
voidwtf wrote: post #35

I don't want to discourage the developers working on this project, but I'm curious why we're still writing applications that will almost certainly execute or process hostile content in languages that don't maintain strict memory safe contract? Have we not learned our lesson yet, or am I misunderstanding the situation? I believe it was a Microsoft study that linked unsafe memory access to ~70% of exploit chains.

Andreas (the author of ladybird) started a language[0] that would be memory-safe and in which he would eventually write SerenityOS (and I assume LadyBird too). He hasn't committed to it for 6 months now so not sure what the status is. At the end of the day, LadyBird is still a hobby project, so one of the main objective is to have fun which does not always coincide with rationality (although the decision to move on f…

Jakt was described more as an experiment and to potentially replace C++ in the codebase, rather than definitely. I haven't seen any official word on this but as you imply I would assume that this effort is essentially dead now. Just as with the operating system itself, the focus eventually shifted elsewhere and Jakt was left behind.

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#98

Post by branko_d »

From the linked site:

> In the post-Spectre world you must have site isolation. The JS for a site (roughly, eTLD+1) must have its own OS address space separate from other sites.

Wasn't the whole point of Spectre/Meltdown to read the virtual address space of a different process?

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#99

Post by asddubs »

Lammy wrote: post #30
dsalfdslfdsa wrote: post #21

I was recently browsing their docs, and kept finding references to choosing a "browser chrome" (options including Qt and AppKit). Is this some new usage of the word "chrome" that I'm not familiar with, or does it use chrome libraries?

Google co-opted an already common term into a Proper Noun™. https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Chrome http://www.catb.org/%7Eesr/jargon/html/C/chrome.html Netscape called it that and thus so does Mozilla. Try loading up `chrome://branding/content/about-logo.png` for an example of the chrome URI scheme in Firefox!

Specifically google originally chose that name for chrome because one of their goals was reduction of chrome. They made a bit deal out of it when the browser was new, how it didn't have a bunch of menu bars or whatever

Re: Ladybird browser spreads its wings

#100

Post by asddubs »

samiv wrote: post #94

I'm already speculating that sooner or later in the future this project will end up pivoting to chromium as the underlying engine. I can think of two reasons for this - money is involved and someone buys them out / influences the direction of the project - the reality of the task ahead sets in the and the dev team gives up on custom engine development For those of you coming back to this comment from the future, yep…

I doubt it. Your prediction might be more appropriate for a project that's in its first week of development, not having been developed for several years and already overcome many difficult hurdles. And if they switch to chromium, there is literally nothing interesting about this project. The fact that it's a novel engine is their only differentiating feature.
Post reply on HN