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

ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

blogs.windows.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 324 posts

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#81

Post by jdmichal »

Artemis2 wrote: post #62
Klathmon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having more than one engine can mean that there is less of a V8 monoculture. Bugs in V8 don't become "standard" and "things that V8 is really good at" doesn't become "things that Javascript is really good at".

That's what Go does. The reference of the language is [an actual document]( https://golang.org/ref/spec ), not a reference implementation. There are two compilers (gc and gccgo), and this way, no edge-case of an implementation can make its way into programmers' habits, something that tends to happen a lot with JavaScript.

Microsoft was surprisingly open in this regard with C#. The C# language and the CLI bytecode are both ECMA standards (334 and 335) that could be implemented by anyone. Of course, this is with the realization that the .NET standard library gives Microsoft's C# implementation a lot of staying power.

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#82

Post by creshal »

School-Cotton wrote: post #17
creshal wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aka, Microsoft is again in the "embrace" stage of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish. (Even if its current management has the noblest intentions, who knows how it'll be in two or three years?)

Do you have anything to back this up other than it being your knee-jerk reaction? Microsoft's entire leadership has turned over and it's easy to see that their culture is very different from the days you're talking about. Also, they don't have a monopoly on nearly anything and certainly not on Javascript engines. They couldn't move to the "Extend, Extinguish" phases even if they wanted to.

> Microsoft's entire leadership has turned over and it's easy to see that their culture is very different from the days you're talking about.

Yes. They made a 180° turn already. Who says they won't do another?

Customer lock-in isn't Bill Gates' idea. It's a very tempting strategy that you can find virtually everywhere where companies think it'll gain them money.

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#83

Post by krisdol »

binarycrusader wrote: post #63
chejazi wrote: post #29

Good that it's open source, but I found this blurb from their contributing guidelines [0] to be contribution inhibiting: You will need to complete a Contributor License Agreement (CLA) before your pull request can be accepted. This agreement testifies that you are granting us permission to use the source code you are submitting, and that this work is being submitted under appropriate license that we can use it. [0] h…

Yes, many projects do not, but some very popular ones do: Google Go requires one. Apache requires one. Some FSF projects require one. I could go on, but the point is that CLAs exist for good reasons. There may be another, different way to accomplish the same goals, but since it isn't my pocketbook funding the project, I don't feel like I have a right to complain. As such, just because a project has a CLA doesn't mean…

In the case of the MIT license, I don't see much harm in throwing in a CLA because it's nearly impossible for Microsoft to do anything to break the terms of the license; however, while I am not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice, in general signing a CLA (including in this instance) often gives the other party rights to re-license the work and continue to use the work if they end up in violation of the original license. For istance, a hugely popular, third-party Minecraft modification platform called Bukkit was partially licensed under the GPL (v2, I believe); however, it turned out that this code was not permitted to be distributed as GPL because it linked to to proprietary code, and Mojang was not eager to open source anything anytime soon. Because contributors submitted their contributions to be used under the terms of the GPL, and the project failed to meet the requirements of the GPL, contributors were then able to file legal DMCA notices of copyright infringement to take down the project.

Regardless of what license the project is filed under, as an individual contributor working for free for the community, the license of a project determines the terms under which I am sharing my work. I expect those to be respected in perpetuity, and I would like the right to rescind my contribution if the copyright holder is in violation of the license.

(Please don't turn this into a GPL vs MIT discussion)

EDIT

Echoing other responders here, if you downvoted I would really appreciate the discussion of why.

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#84

Post by wslh »

jrcii wrote: post #31
DoubleMalt wrote: post #14

Even if I'm in danger of stating the obvious, but MS really changed its approach to software. And it is incredibly great having competition in the JS engine market.

> MS really changed its approach to software Their open-source friendliness has unfortunately coincided with a decline of their respect for user privacy and choice (Windows 10). I find the "New Microsoft" bittersweet.

I don't really like the user privacy approach on Windows 10 but I wonder if they will change that approach soon or someone else (third party) will came up with a tool to automatically handle this issue.

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#85

Post by creshal »

Someone1234 wrote: post #60
krisdol wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't it be far easier with MIT than GPL? The BSD license sure did little to keep the open source roots of Mac OS thriving.

It could help Microsoft close source THEIR implementation later down the line, but it doesn't help them "extinguish" it completely, particularly if third parties wish to maintain it. MIT makes it easy to fork and relatively easy to re-license.

Even if companies had been able to fork IE6, it would not have changed anything.

(Companies are able to fork WebKit, and yet it's on a good track to become the new IE6, because Apple doesn't care and their market share force everyone to work around bugs in iOS/OSX Safari.)

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#86

Post by epmatsw »

saurik wrote: post #73
epmatsw wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chakra's not on there yet, but I'd expect it to be soon after this announcement: https://arewefastyet.com

Nor is JavaScriptCore, which has made that website pretty useless to me as of late.

Wow, I totally missed that somehow. Sorry for the useless comment haha

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#87

Post by saurik »

sylvinus wrote: post #22
brianwawok wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the advantage of this? What does 1 more JS engine buy us?

Competition! Now both teams have one more incentive to innovate and we get better software in the end.

As far as I understand, v8 doesn't care about node, and would never think twice about doing something that breaks the entire node ecosystem if it makes Chrome slightly faster. FWIW, they aren't even "wrong": it makes sense to me. What is interesting here is not "competition" but "someone who builds a JavaScript engine wants you as a user".

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#88

Post by frigg »

jrcii wrote: post #31
DoubleMalt wrote: post #14

Even if I'm in danger of stating the obvious, but MS really changed its approach to software. And it is incredibly great having competition in the JS engine market.

> MS really changed its approach to software Their open-source friendliness has unfortunately coincided with a decline of their respect for user privacy and choice (Windows 10). I find the "New Microsoft" bittersweet.

>Their open-source friendliness has unfortunately coincided with a decline of their respect for user privacy and choice (Windows 10).

As far as I know they give you the option to opt out of everything. Are they bad even for asking?

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#89

Post by Arkanosis »

DoubleMalt wrote: post #75
jrcii wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> MS really changed its approach to software Their open-source friendliness has unfortunately coincided with a decline of their respect for user privacy and choice (Windows 10). I find the "New Microsoft" bittersweet.

While this is true, only open source makes choice and privacy even possible. They are obviously trying to reinvent themselves partly in the image of Google, whose motto "Don't be evil" also sounds very hollow nowadays. But I shudder when I think of a world where Google is built upon closed software. [To clarify: I know that Google does not open most of their software. However, with their reliance on open source softw…

Well, actually, most of the issues I've with Google are related with some of their closed software.

Which makes me agree very hard with your first point, btw.

Re: ChakraCore GitHub repository is now open

#90

Post by magicalist »

PeCaN wrote: post #39
brianwawok wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the advantage of this? What does 1 more JS engine buy us?

Well, Chakra is a bit ahead of V8 in ES6 implementation right now. https://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/

Actually, try it with current Chrome Canary (V8 version 4.9.355). They just hit 92% with no flags.
Post reply on HN