[webkit-dev] Is WebKit's javascript subpar?

[David Hyatt]

Criticizing JavaScriptCore is a red herring.  Usually when people say  
they have a problem with "JavaScript" in a browser, what they really  
mean is that they hit some compatibility bug in the native code of  
the engine that JavaScriptCore happened to invoke . Very few  
compatibility bugs are actual JavaScript language bugs.  Most of them  
are bugs in the WebCore engine itself.

dave
(hyatt at apple.com)

On May 26, 2006, at 7:36 AM, Mike Emmel wrote:

> On 5/26/06, Colin Barrett <timber at lava.net> wrote:
>>
>> I don't mean to white knight, but I don't think Rentzsch was  
>> saying "WebKit
>> sucks, Firefox roolz". I think he was merely pointing out that  
>> there are
>> still problems with Dashcode becoming a full-fledged AJAX IDE.
>>
>> I haven't read any of the other blog posts on Dashcode, I don't  
>> know what
>> they're saying. However, I think, in general, it's important to  
>> remember:
>>
>> 1) Dashcode isn't even officially released. It's only through a  
>> mistake that
>> we even know about it.
>> 2) Safari, JSCore, WebCore, and WebKit have spent a lot less time  
>> as mature
>> frameworks than their Moz equivalents. There has been a lot of  
>> improvement
>> since WebKit went public, and I think we're going to continue to  
>> see more.
>>
>> The "pundits" have a valid point: at this stage, JSCore is still  
>> playing
>> catchup with FF. That's a bit of a red herring, though. What's  
>> important is
>> that the WebKit guys are playing the game—unlike IE, which has  
>> gone nowhere.
>> You miss 100% of the shots you don't take.
>>
>> -Colin
>>
>
> Yes but ...
>
> It turns out I read the page on the Javascript engine a while back its
> not changed much since then. It would be nice if some concrete plans
> or proposal to improve JSCore were presented for example it would be
> possible to integrate spidermonkey behind the JSCore api and replace
> the exsisting interperter. That approach has a lot of plusses they
> firefox/webkit team can join forces on the JS interpeter .
> It already has a C api Bytecode support and E4X the three main
> features requested.
> Collaboration here is immensly valuable and should not be  
> underestimated.
>
> Whats missing is a good garbage collector or more important a plugin
> framework for one
> and its a bit bloated this can be fixed.
>
> Its what I conisider and obvious solution so explaining why or why not
> that approach should be taken would be valuable.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>>
>> On May 25, 2006, at 9:22 PM, David D. Kilzer wrote:
>>
>> WebKit's JavaScript engine is a completely different code base  
>> than the one
>> in Firefox.  Although WebKit's JS engine has not achieved feature- 
>> parity
>> with Firefox, there are a number of people spending their own time
>> documenting bugs, writing test cases, and coding fixes for these  
>> bugs.  And
>> that doesn't even include the Apple employees working on the project.
>>
>> It's a lot easier to post a blog entry saying that WebKit lacks a  
>> feature
>> than it is to implement a missing feature or fix a broken feature.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On May 25, 2006, at 10:50 PM, Colin Barrett wrote:
>>
>>
>> [...]
>> My main question is: Is WebKit's JS worse than FF's, or simply not  
>> the same,
>> which could lead to breakage.
>>
>> -Colin
>>
>> On May 25, 2006, at 3:04 PM, Abhi Beckert wrote:
>>
>>
>> I've seen several blog posts recently (eg:
>> http://rentzsch.com/code/dashcodeForAjaxAppDevelopment)
>> that boldly
>> state WebKit's "ajax support" is vastly inferior to FireFox. [...]
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> webkit-dev mailing list
>> webkit-dev at opendarwin.org
>> http://www.opendarwin.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev at opendarwin.org
> http://www.opendarwin.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev