Clearly never read the spec, knows nothing about browsers, ignorant. Which isn’t generally a position I prefer to condescend from
-
-
Replying to @mattgperry @brothir and
You haven't understood what I am saying. "The spec" as it currently exists is a fundamentally bad idea about how to solve this class of problem. The results are obviously terrible. People should observe and learn from this, but somehow don't.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow @mattgperry and
That's not really true though. I mean as I said before, I'd rather use something better and faster. What do you expect the web dev community to do? Write a different browser? How's that gonna work? Nobody wants to live with legacy APIs and slow code.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RihoKroll @mattgperry and
The job of engineers is to solve problems. If those problems don't get solved, it is because people didn't solve them.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow @mattgperry and
It's not an engineering problem. You can write an amazing new browser tomorrow, but if it doesn't display 90% of the web pages properly, and doesn't handle accessibility and different device types/screens, nobody will keep using it. How do you get people to adopt that?
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @RihoKroll @Jonathan_Blow and
I mean for the sake of the argument, lets forget about compatibility for a moment, say through some miracle this new browser just works, or at least with most modern pages. You still have to convince people to switch. "It's better" doesn't work, ask Mozilla.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RihoKroll @mattgperry and
Only if the switch is discontinuous. It is actually not that hard, given WASM etc, to envision a series of transformations that, for example, removes JS from the browser entirely. It only requires will.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow @RihoKroll and
Once you remove JS from the browser, now the Web is no longer based on an error-prone slow programming language, so it's a lot more natural for people to choose higher-quality languages (as opposed to hacks on top of JS like TypeScript).
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow @RihoKroll and
Then once you have real programming languages, why do you have all this DOM stuff and wtf is CSS for anyway, just let peoples' code lay out the text, and get rid of all that junk.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow @RihoKroll and
“Wtf is CSS for” just about sums this up
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
If you don’t understand how awful and embarrassing CSS is, it’s going to be very difficult for me to figure out anything else to say. I can just refer you to:
-
-
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow @mattgperry and
Jonathan Blow Retweeted Casey Muratori
(this subthread by Casey, which I also agree with):https://mobile.twitter.com/cmuratori/status/1387634832880984064 …
Jonathan Blow added,
Casey Muratori @cmuratoriReplying to @RihoKroll @Jonathan_Blow @eXodiquasMy main complaint is actually that the web fails at both simultaneously. If browsers actually provided high-quality page layout and rendering, flawless UI integration with the host, polished widgets, etc., I perhaps wouldn't be as upset that they are also excruciatingly slow.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Jonathan_Blow @mattgperry and
And then the other thing to understand is, the use case of CSS is not how it is used today. Both HTML and CSS were designed for a different vision of what Web documents were supposed to be, that isn’t the one that won out on the market. As a result they are totally inappropriate
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.