Re: [Edbrowse-dev] edbrowse-js back in the fold??

[Chris Brannon <chris@the-brannons.com>]

Adam Thompson <arthompson1990@gmail.com> writes:

>> 5. All of edbrowse is once again a c++ program (a minor nuisance).
>
> That assumes we stick with our already rather outdated spidermonkey version

Any progress with looking into duktape?
Would you like me to have a go at it?

> I'm not sure about the portability of <shared_memory_api> but I'm not sure that's where we should go either.
> I think, if I remember my original design correctly,
> I was thinking more of having the DOM in a separate process,
> may be even one per browser buffer. We went for just moving the js at the time
> because we needed to encapsulate things and allow switching js engines,

Yes, this is also how I remember that discussion.

> I was thinking, seeing as we need all sorts of networking,
> asynchronous processing etc, whether it'd make sense to look at using a library to do this.

So how would that look, exactly?

> Or head down the above route. I'd also throw out there
> that we have web sockets becoming a
> progressively larger "thing" in web development,

And we also have stuff like HTTP/2 server push coming up on us.