Hi Jesse, Hadrien,
> > In regard to "replace webkit with something sane" from the TODO.md
> > fileincluded within surf. I'm not sure if you all are aware of this:
> > https://github.com/SteveDeFacto/zsurf
> > Little abandoned project in the vein of surf, but using webengine
> > backend.
> >
> > I'm a huge fan of Suckless. Use dwm, dmenu, and st daily. Webkit is
> > all that stops me from using surf. I work in web development and sadly
> > most websites are optimised for use with webengine/blink. I know
> > virtually nothing about C and such. Yet I am easily able to configure
> > every suckless tool/utility. This is no doubt due to extensive
> > documentation and logical configuration. It's also nice having
> > my config baked into the source code, as a fork. Versus having to
> > keep track of config files. Nor do I have to worry about pacman
> > updating the software to be incompatible with my configurations.
> >
> > Anyway, thought I'd float this out to you guys. Might be a good
> > starting point for surf with a webengine backend.
> >
> > -Jesse Limerick
> >
> >
>
> I think you're lost, mate. If you want some hints about why: webkit's
> tar.xz is 20M while qtwebengine is 244M, one is made in C and useable in
> C while the other is a C++ only abomination requiring Qt.
> Don't misunderstand, though, Webkit is also horrible.
While webkit is C++ too, don't be naive about that, this is true that
the GTK port wrapper is C and this is nicer to interface with it.
I don't think that even if we wanted to interface with QtWebengine,
it's possible to build it outside the whole Qt framework.
There is little to no incentive from Google to make a good C API for
interfacing with CEF/blink/whatever and even less for having a humanly
bearable way to build it so not much in that way either.
WebkitGTK is still the less sucky backend available, but it remains an
ugly monster.
Received on Sat Jan 25 2020 - 18:22:18 CET