Having worked on browser engines, I don't think this is a straightforward example of poor code. There are many optimizations that the complexity of the web platform means you have to disable in more complex conditions. (1/?)
Yes, but the accusation was that this could have been caused by nothing except malice, which seems ridiculous. It seems like a very straightforward case of a slow path being triggered accidentally, I can think of a million innocent reasons I might want a placeholder div.
-
-
The accusation was also that the team was totally unresponsive to suggestions from the engineering team that maintains a browser engine with 5% market share, which I think adds weight to the first part.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
it's not the triggering of the performance cliff that's the problem here. That's fine, that happens all the time, that's because people aren't testing in Edge. The problem is not fixing it after it was reported.
-
I think I disagree, the party with the bug should fix it - in this case Edge failed to handle valid and reasonable markup correctly, but rather than fix it asked for other people to workaround the bug. The website *did* change to accommodate them, and you still see a problem.

- 11 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don’t believe that YouTube engineers were malicious or had a primary goal of breaking Edge, but I also think their motivation/intent ultimately matters very little if the end result is the same (never ending compat nightmare
web monoculture) -
I get why it’s important to people inside the browser-maker bubble - having your motivations questioned will always raise hackles. But kind of a sideshow really when it comes to substantive issue: single-steward for the web is suboptimal no matter how benevolent they are
End of conversation
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.
