Why we Forked Firefox and Not Chromium

Re:Why we Forked Firefox and Not Chromium by kllrnohj on Wednesday December 18, 2019 @02:21PM (#21828272)

That doesn't make any more sense. They seem to be conflating "it's been bound to the internal scripting system" with "open API"

Whether or not it's been bound to a scripting language does not make it any more or less "open" or stable (which is what they seem to actually be looking for - stability). They forked the code, everything is an "open API" at that point. There is no concept of open API vs. not when you're just talking about the source of a project.

Whether or not an internal API is stable is relevant. But that stability is independent of which language it's in, and the only way to determine that is to either look for author intent or history of the API. Just because it's currently exposed to JavaScript doesn't mean it's stable at all.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why we Forked Firefox and Not Chromium by varelaz on Wednesday December 18, 2019 @02:23PM (#21828307)

It does. For example Firefox made some features as API and declared interfaces, while Chrome didn't and left it as internal functions, which you cannot rely on, you cannot be sure that interface won't change.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why we Forked Firefox and Not Chromium by kllrnohj on Wednesday December 18, 2019 @04:02PM (#21829419)

Unless it's exported to 3rd parties it's an internal function. Just because it's JavaScript doesn't make it stable API.

And just because it's internal doesn't mean it's not an API.

[ Parent | on HN ]