This a project idea.
I think that we need more browser engines. It is still just an idea but I want to try it. (Not alone of course)
I'm not so sure about the idea of using a lisp for the engine, but maybe having a lisp interpreter in it would be doable, that way it's possible to expand relatively easily, but you still get a native binary (not aware of a lisp that compiles to machine code). Would certainly be nice to see more options in the browser area.
@architect there are enough native lisp implementations. It won't be easy though. I have no idea how to even start.
@RMW one thing i have been annoyed lately on my main browser is that i cannot search tabs easily via vim bindings plugin.
and i cannot move from my pinned tabs to wherever tabs are scolled to focus,
similar to wrapped and not wrapped lines in Vim.
Otherwise i do agree there seems to be more or less 2 or 1.5 browser engines in use atm.
@Unairedspecifics vim and emacs binding support would be cool now that you mention that.
I still need to do some research before I can start.
@RMW Since i started using VimFX in Waterfox and use Qutebrowser for some things i think Vim bindings and Hinting is something that is needed in browsing.
Like the idea of optional JS etc.
That look fun.
Since nothing is set in really defined yet, did you considered the rust language for that? After all Mozilla is supporting this language for the exact same goal: bringing the best browser engine to life.
And I don't know Lisp but I am interested in why peoples are choosing language X or Y for their projects. So if you care to explain I'm curious
@Zykino LISP like languages are things that I have always found interesting.
Common Lisp for example follows the philosophy that what's good for the language's designer is good for the language's users.
Some call LISP langs "programmable programming langs".
Rust is not a bad pick either but LISP is kinda know for extendabilty and I find that important. Emacs Lisp might be one of the best examples of this. The text-editor can act like an OS.
It is hard to describe why it is great though.
@Zykino I also just really want to learn more of the lang. I only know some simple basics.
It won't be easy but it is worth a try.
@RMW I'm not sure to understand how adding extendability to a browser engine with the language is a good thing. I think extention of a browser should be sandboxed (web extentions) to keep the user safe.
I never used Emacs so it may not help me to understand 😅
I think we feel the same: you are enjoying learning LISP while I'm enjoying learning Rust.
@RMW Also less technical but a bit more high level I think a new browser engine would be a sane addition to the web paysage.
And what we really are missing right now is a viable option to concurrence electron. Apparently gecko is hard to use as a desktop app and electron is bloated.
@Zykino I agree, electron apps are usually so heavy. Many old pc's can't even run them properly.
Extendability usually means that it does not come with too much unless you install the needed packages.
This gives the user choice, the user could install more secure packages when they are available even when the team behind the engine doesn't wants to support the package.
I am not sure how to implement it yet but I think that I will start by reading a LISP book before I create anything.
Isn't it like dynamic dependency?
Or maybe-more like when apt tel me the optionnal dependencies of a program?
Like with apt it tells you: you installed foo with its bar dependency. You can optionnaly install foo-mail or foo-xmpp too.
@Zykino I am not sure what you mean with "dynamic dependency",
but the emacs package-manager is a bit like apt if that answers your question.
I wanted to write "dynamic linkage" instead of dependency.
Linux Geeks doing what Linux Geeks do..