On 04/29/2016 08:30 AM, sn...@snorp.net wrote:
> The engineers in Platform consistently want to dismiss mobile-specific 
> issues, and this is a great example. If you really want to get ICU into 
> Fennec, find a way to do it without bloating the APK size instead of bullying 
> the Fennec folks.

Your point is taken, modulo quibbling (that some might characterize more 
strongly).  Not all size questions should be/are viewed alike by Platform or 
even by individual engineers.  For example, I heard about a recent 
few-hundred-K hit purely for quality of service, which seemed a bit much to me 
and you both.  (Deliberately not saying whodunit.)  But okay.

DOM features rarely die, so there's a limit to how much code we can remove.  
And web developers (and by extension end users visiting their sites) expect 
browsers to do increasingly many things, so we must continue adding code.  Intl 
isn't special; it's just one new feature of many (albeit one with fundamentally 
irreducible complexity, human communication being beyond the control even of 
web standards bodies, let alone us).  This story will never change with Gecko.

But we can't fully serve developers with the stagnating system-based engine.  
It'll be difficult to impossible to offer new layout/rendering features, new 
DOM features, hypothetical browser-integration improvements into existing 
features, new JS features that aren't standard library additions, or new JS 
standard library additions *that are optimally fast in JITs*.  It'll be 
functionally impossible to affect the development of standards having 
particular (or perhaps sole) importance on mobile, using an uncontrollable 
rendering engine.  Yet another browser shell does not promote "choice and 
innovation on the Internet", especially so on mobile where increasingly more 
browsing occurs now.

Gecko, like any big codebase, has flab.  I can't estimate how much.  But 
there's practically zero possibility it has flab matching the numbers suggested 
in <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1215247#c14>, implicitly 
desiring a 50%+ size reduction, no matter how far Platform bends over backward, 
or how cooperative Platform engineers are.

Jeff
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Reply via email to