Microsoft Edge 134 brings significant performance enhancements across the board. Startup is faster thanks to Profile Guided Optimization (PGO) and a more efficient browser process initialization. Sleeping tabs, now enabled by default, reduce memory usage by 83% and CPU usage by 32% compared to discarded tabs. The browser also optimizes resource allocation for active tabs, improving performance even with many tabs open. Further enhancements include improved video playback performance, faster page loading from browser history, and reduced input latency. These changes result in a smoother, more responsive browsing experience with less resource consumption.
Rebuilding Ubuntu packages from source with sccache, a compiler cache, can drastically reduce compile times, sometimes up to 90%. The author demonstrates this by building the Firefox package, achieving a 7x speedup compared to a clean build and a 2.5x speedup over using the system's build cache. This significant performance improvement is attributed to sccache's ability to effectively cache and reuse compilation results, both locally and remotely via cloud storage. This approach can be particularly beneficial for continuous integration and development workflows where frequent rebuilds are necessary.
Hacker News users discuss various aspects of the proposed method for speeding up Ubuntu package builds. Some express skepticism, questioning the 90% claim and pointing out potential downsides like increased rebuild times after initial installation and the burden on build servers. Others suggest the solution isn't practical for diverse hardware environments and might break dependency chains. Some highlight the existing efforts within the Ubuntu community to optimize build times and suggest collaboration. A few users appreciate the idea, acknowledging the potential benefits while also recognizing the complexities and trade-offs involved in implementing such a system. The discussion also touches on the importance of reproducible builds and the challenges of maintaining package integrity.
Microsoft is developing a new TypeScript compiler implementation called "tsc-native" built using native C++. This new compiler aims to drastically improve TypeScript compilation speed, potentially making it up to 10x faster than the existing JavaScript-based compiler. The project leverages the V8 JavaScript engine's TurboFan JIT compiler to optimize performance-critical parts of the type checking process. While still experimental, initial benchmarks show significant improvements, particularly for large projects. The team is actively working on refining the compiler and invites community feedback as they progress towards a production-ready release.
Hacker News users discussed the potential impact of a native TypeScript compiler. Some expressed skepticism about the claimed 10x speed improvement, emphasizing the need for real-world benchmarks and noting that compile times aren't always the bottleneck in TypeScript development. Others questioned the long-term viability of the project given Microsoft's previous attempts at native compilation. Several commenters pointed out that JavaScript's dynamic nature presents inherent challenges for ahead-of-time compilation and optimization, and wondered how the project would address issues like runtime type checking and dynamic module loading. There was also interest in whether the native compiler would support features like decorators and reflection. Some users expressed hope that a faster compiler could enable new use cases for TypeScript, like scripting and game development.
File Pilot is a new file manager focused on speed and a modern user experience. It boasts instant startup and file browsing, a dual-pane interface for efficient file operations, and extensive customization options like themes and keyboard shortcuts. Built with a robust architecture using Rust and Qt, File Pilot aims to provide a reliable and performant alternative to existing file explorers on Windows, macOS, and Linux. Key features include tabbed browsing, a built-in terminal, seamless file previews, and advanced filtering capabilities. File Pilot is currently available as a free technical preview.
HN commenters generally praised File Pilot's speed and clean interface, with several noting its responsiveness felt superior even to native file managers. Some appreciated specific features like the tabbed interface, customizable keyboard shortcuts, and the dual-pane view. A few users requested features like the ability to edit text files directly within the application and improved search functionality. Concerns were raised about the developer's choice to use Electron, citing potential performance overhead and resource consumption. There was also discussion around the lack of a Linux version and the developer's plans for future development and monetization. Some commenters expressed skepticism about the long-term viability of the project given its reliance on a single developer.
Bzip3, developed as a modern reimagining of Bzip2, aims to deliver significantly improved compression ratios and speed. It leverages a larger block size, an enhanced Burrows-Wheeler transform, and a more efficient entropy coder based on Asymmetric Numeral Systems (ANS). While maintaining compatibility with the Bzip2 file format for compressed data, Bzip3 boasts compression performance competitive with modern algorithms like zstd and LZMA, coupled with significantly faster decompression than Bzip2. The project's primary goal is to offer a compelling alternative for scenarios requiring robust compression and rapid decompression.
Hacker News users discussed bzip3's performance improvements, particularly its speed increases due to parallelization and its competitive compression ratios compared to bzip2 and other algorithms like zstd and LZMA. Some expressed excitement about its potential and the author's rigorous approach. Several commenters questioned its practical value given the dominance of zstd and the maturity of existing compression tools. Others pointed out that specialized use cases, like embedded systems or situations prioritizing decompression speed, could benefit from bzip3. Some skepticism was voiced about its long-term maintenance given it's a one-person project, alongside curiosity about the new Burrows-Wheeler transform implementation. The use of SIMD and the detailed explanation of design choices in the README were also praised.
Git's autocorrect, specifically the help.autocorrect setting, can be frustratingly quick, correcting commands before users finish typing. This blog post explores the speed of this feature, demonstrating that even with deliberately slow, hunt-and-peck typing, Git often corrects commands before a human could realistically finish inputting them. The author argues that this aggressive correction behavior disrupts workflow and can lead to unintended actions, especially for complex or unfamiliar commands. They propose increasing the default autocorrection delay from 50ms to a more human-friendly value, suggesting 200ms as a reasonable starting point to allow users more time to complete their input. This would improve the user experience by striking a better balance between helpful correction and premature interruption.
HN commenters largely discussed the annoyance of Git's aggressive autocorrect, particularly git push becoming git pull, leading to unintended overwrites of local changes. Some suggested the speed of the correction is disorienting, making it hard to interrupt, even for experienced users. Several proposed solutions were mentioned, including increasing the correction delay, disabling autocorrect for certain commands, or using aliases entirely. The behavior of git help was also brought up, with some arguing its prompt should be less aggressive as typos are common when searching documentation. A few questioned the blog post's F1 analogy, finding it weak, and others pointed out alternative shell configurations like zsh and fish which offer improved autocorrection experiences. There was also a thread discussing the implementation of the autocorrection feature itself, suggesting improvements based on Levenshtein distance and context.
Summary of Comments ( 54 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43674159
Hacker News users generally expressed skepticism towards Microsoft's performance claims about Edge 134. Several commenters questioned the methodology and benchmarks used, pointing out the lack of specifics and the potential for cherry-picked results. Some suggested that perceived performance improvements might be due to disabling features or aggressive caching. Others noted that while benchmarks might show improvements, real-world performance, particularly memory usage, remains a concern for Edge. A few users offered anecdotal evidence, with some reporting positive experiences and others experiencing continued performance issues. The overall sentiment leans towards cautious observation rather than outright acceptance of Microsoft's claims.
The Hacker News post titled "Significant performance improvements with Edge 134" linking to a Windows blog post about Edge browser performance has generated several comments discussing various aspects of the browser and its performance claims.
Several commenters express skepticism about Microsoft's performance claims, pointing out that benchmarks presented by browser vendors should be taken with a grain of salt. They suggest that real-world performance and individual user experience can vary significantly. Some also mention the importance of considering factors beyond synthetic benchmarks, such as extensions used and specific website optimizations.
One commenter questions the methodology used in the benchmarks, specifically regarding the choice of competitors and the specific tests performed. They highlight the potential for bias when a vendor performs their own benchmarking and publishes the results. The commenter implies a desire for more transparent and independently verifiable performance comparisons.
Another thread of discussion revolves around the perception of Edge as "Chrome but worse." Commenters debate whether Edge offers any tangible benefits over Chrome, given their shared Chromium base. Some users express satisfaction with Edge, citing specific features or performance improvements they have experienced. Others argue that Edge primarily serves as a means for Microsoft to collect user data and promote its services.
A few commenters discuss the broader browser landscape, touching on topics such as the dominance of Chromium-based browsers and the challenges faced by alternative browsers like Firefox. They lament the lack of true competition and innovation in the browser market.
Some technical details about Edge's specific optimizations are discussed, including Sleeping Tabs and startup boost. Commenters share anecdotal experiences with these features and their impact on performance. However, there isn't in-depth technical analysis of the claimed improvements within the comments.
Finally, there's a brief discussion about the relevance of browser performance in modern hardware. Some commenters argue that with powerful CPUs and ample RAM, the performance differences between browsers are negligible for most users. Others contend that browser performance remains important, especially for users with lower-end hardware or specific use cases like intensive web applications.