The most complex part of a web browser engine is rendering

HTML and CSS parsing is easy peasy compared to it.
Cudder, how far is your web browser from a general perspective of actually working as a browser?
Are you still cleaning it up before putting it on public domain?

sage

I got something to put in public domain.
*grabs dick*

>>2
One bump is stronger than a thousand sages.

>>4
May you suffer threadstop by a thousand sages.

>>5
May you suffer discoloration by a thousand beiges.

>>5
May you suffer incineration by a thousand mages.

>>7
May you wander forever in a thousand mazes.

May you get really stoned after a thousand blazes.

May you post on /g/ a thousand images.

Dubs. Just dubs.

check 'em

HTML parser basically done.
CSS parser being worked on (tokeniser part almost done, still needs recursive part and consideration of CSS datastrutures.)
Nothing else.

Not much time because I'm busy with other things. I did test the parser with a 100MB HTML file that crashed all the other browsers I had, and it handled it with no problems, with an expansion of ~5.5 (see https://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1321853871 for an explanation of what that means.)

Use the existing thread, no need for another one:
http://bbs.progrider.org/prog/read/1406427616

sage

>>1
Use a constraint solver, retard.

>>13
What do you think will be the hardest thing to do in order to get the browser engine working?
Since the HTML parser is basically done, should we expect its release on the public domain soon?

>>16
sage

ｄｅｌ

Good threads should be near the top.

sage

ｄｅｌ

the most complex part of a web browser engine is actually to check my dubs

ｄｅｌ

https://www.udacity.com/course/programming-languages--cs262

Cudder only uses GDI+, so it'll be easy, since she won't have to waste time on OpenGL bloat.

>>25

she

Shalom!

Meanwhile ``Web assembly'' is coming:

Today’s Big News

It’s by now a cliché that JS has become the assembly language of the Web. Rather, JS is one syntax for a portable and safe machine language, let’s say. Today I’m pleased to announce that cross-browser work has begun on WebAssembly, a new intermediate representation for safe code on the Web.

What: WebAssembly, “wasm” for short, .wasm filename suffix, a new binary syntax for low-level safe code, initially co-expressive with asm.js, but in the long run able to diverge from JS’s semantics, in order to best serve as common object-level format for multiple source-level programming languages.

It’s crucial that wasm and asm stay equivalent for a decent interval, to support polyfilling of wasm support via JS. This remains crucial even as JS and asm.js evolve to sprout shared memory threads and SIMD support. Examples of possible longer-term divergence: zero-cost exceptions, dynamic linking, call/cc. Yes, we are aiming to develop the Web’s polyglot-programming-language object-file format.

Why: asm.js is great, but once engines optimize for it, the parser becomes the hot spot — very hot on mobile devices. Transport compression is required and saves bandwidth, but decompression before parsing hurts. A secondary consideration: JS has a few awkward corners even in its asm.js subset. Finally, once browsers support the WebAssembly syntax natively, JS and wasm can diverge, without introducing unsafe or inappropriate features into JS just for use by compilers sourcing a few radically different programming languages.

See the FAQ for more nuance and detail. No, JS isn’t going away in any foreseeable future. Yes, wasm should relieve JS from having to serve two masters. This is a win-win plan.

https://brendaneich.com/2015/06/from-asm-js-to-webassembly/#buried-lede

>>27
It's fucking amazing that there are people that think that Javascript is too low level for document scripting.