Hacker News Reader

Comment by andsoitis | Hacker News Reader

> but none of them met all our requirements, so we decided to try writing our own library.

Question requirements.

You can always find a reason to build rather than buy, but can you reframe your requirements in such a way that you can get away with something off the shelf and then rather spend your resources on the things that you can do uniquely different for your application.

View on HN

Maybe try to build your own Browser and try to keep up with upstream that has daily changes in the hundreds of commits...and then realize how elitarian that answer was?

They are a software product fork used by billions, with a team that doesn't get paid to develop on it, with not enough funding to just "buy" a battle tested library which has zero problems; because any bug would literally potentially break the web for years.

I mean I really don't know what library they could've tried other than Skia that's suitable to build a GPU renderer for Canvas's API, and they explain why they were hesitant to try Skia. Do you have any suggestions?

Mozilla's WebRender. It's actually a better option by their own criteria because it's developed as a standalone reusable library.

Oh I read the article with the assumption that this was 2D canvas rendering, but upon re-reading it I see that it's probably about normal web content. WebRender would've been a terrible fit for Canvas, but it would certainly make sense if this is about rendering normal web content.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com