On 21 February 2014 07:21, Anselm R Garbe <garbeam_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20 February 2014 18:27, koneu <koneu93_AT_googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Nick wrote:
>>> Yes, but the web-viewer could suck less, internally. GTK & glib
>>> being rather obvious examples. With that in mind I thought I'd take
>>> another look at webkitnix today, and found that they're not planning
>>> to maintain it anymore. Which sucks.
>>
>> Sad... I had hoped for uzbl to switch to it so I'd have a reason to
>> leave behind dwb.
>> Then again, Webkit itself sucks so badly that using GTK & glib won't
>> really hurt surf. One could say that surf is a suckless interface to
>> sucky GTK and sucky glib, which interface with C++ WebKit, which in turn
>> interfaces with the World Wide Web of Suck.
>
> I'd say surf should be blink[0] based in the midterm future. I spend
> some effort on checking how it can be statically linked.
>
> Granted, it might suck a whole lot more than webkitgtk, but I see the
> days come, when webkitgtk(+) will fall behind.
>
> The web game isn't suckless. It is suckmore.
[0]
http://www.chromium.org/blink
-Anselm
Received on Fri Feb 21 2014 - 07:22:02 CET