low_battery

I guess as long as it is not default behavior it will stay as a weakness then? I am not sure if it is worth to exchange it for memory or performance gain.

Also is using thread per tab approach more susceptible to memory leaks, resource sharing issues or OS scheduling shenanigans than process per tab approach? You close the tab, the process is dead and resources are mostly guaranteed to returned. My knowledge of modern browsers is limited, maybe this was considered an acceptable compromise though.

If I wasn't clear as well, As far as I can see from the link you gave It still does not match the level of security Chrome offers, it is getting there, but not yet.

Sorry I didn't mean Sandboxing used Rust, It was a separate thing (That Rust is less susceptible to such class of errors, so the more code written in Rust the better) Also didn't mean it has no sandboxing (I knew about efforts), my point was its security is not a match for Chrome yet, as seen from the amount and type of critical errors.

When it is there I would definitely use it along with Chrome.

Oh they are totally not in the same league.

well, lets say fi < 1e-9 fl < 1e-12 and its a mostly a desert outside.

The calculator link you gave is doing exactly the same thing, smallest percentage is 1%. It doesn't make sense.

So much energy is spent making a shitty language perform better. It is really sad.

No it wasn't a one man job.

What took him so long?

Are you in the industry and successful? Do you consider yourself as such; egoist, cold and full of testosterone.

I have seen a lot of successful people, very few fits the description.