Why are so many people here on HN so eager to throw away html/css/js, just because they're a little icky and you don't like to use them?<p>Do you not realise that means throwing away the <i>entire web</i>, and its history going back to the early 1990's? Backwards compatibility and platform stability are GOOD THINGS that we need more, not less of. Lest we perpetually build content for doomed platforms, and leave no mark, no history on the world.<p>the better course is evolution, not revolution.<p>Mozilla has been through every revolution, first hand. They know what they're doing.<p>edit: I'm flattered but please vote up the comments relevant to the actual post.
This is so cool, and I love that Rust is being so heavily driven by the pragmatic needs of an ambitious project like this. As a systems guy, Rust is the most excited I've been about a new language in years.
I am hoping Servo is going to increase the use of Rust. There aren't many resources for it at the moment even though it is at version 0.9. I would think that a language nearing "1.0" would have a wider community by now. Here's hoping!
I would have thought ditching HTML, the box model, CSS and JavaScript to be a more important objective that should come sooner than this. Or another way to put this would be: Wouldn't development efficiency/simplicity be more important than running the current junk in parallel?
Reads like the original Chromium manifesto (comic), plus goals for Blink.<p><a href="https://chromium.googlecode.com/files/chromecomicJPGS.zip" rel="nofollow">https://chromium.googlecode.com/files/chromecomicJPGS.zip</a>
<a href="http://www.chromium.org/blink" rel="nofollow">http://www.chromium.org/blink</a>
I hope when they are rewriting the browser with modern architecture, they keep in mind the problems which kept this bug alive for more than 12 years now (while all other major browsers fixed it one by one), citing 'foundation' or architectural problems:<p><a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=78414" rel="nofollow">https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=78414</a>
> Mozilla on how its Servo engine will throw away the 20th-century baggage that holds back current browsers and harness the power of modern multi-core smartphones and tablets.<p>Then I hope they don't intend on supporting any 32-bit platform. Make a clean start on 64-bit platforms. By the time Servo is out, there should be 64-bit ARM processors cheap enough even for their low-end phones, and on a desktop it should be a nobrainer.
> "It usually only had one core, clock speeds were lower and you had much less memory available to you,"<p>Yeah, right. Modern browsers already eat up several GIGS of memory, while super-advenced-zomg tablets boast of 2G. Most have 1G 80% of which is eaten by the system (and widgets, and other persistent stuff).
But not caring about memory is hype. Because its future, technology, and, you know, Moore's law
Another day and another ambitious project by Mozilla. However, when will Mozilla see these projects thru and give them the proper marketing so they have a chance to thrive?
I wonder if mozilla plans to merge this back into b2g eventually, and how easy that will be. They have several very exciting projects on the go, but some seem to be heading in different directions.
I cannot help but think of Joel Spolsky's article about reasons not to do a complete rewrite of your project -- a lesson he learned after finally shipping the long delayed rewrite of Netscape Navigator (progenitor to Mozilla)<p><a href="http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html</a>
Mozilla seems like a post-capitalist non-profit for the benefit of bored programmers everywhere, sponsoring such useful work as "lets rewrite the browser".<p>It's not yet another HTTP, HTML, CSS .. implementation that is needed, it's <i>making these standards sane</i> and fit for 2014.