"WebKit's core JavaScript engine just got a new interpreter, code-named SquirrelFish." According to the Webkit blog, SquirrelFish is 1.6 times faster than WebKit's previous interpreter. This detailed blog entry explains exactly why the new engine is so much faster and the Webkit team's plans for continued improvement in rendering speeds. 
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-07-20
Member since:2007-05-12
Member since:2007-03-29
It has been included into Qt.
http://www.osnews.com/story/19720/Qt_4.4_Released
But unfortunately Konqueror does not use it.
Edited 2008-06-03 19:36 UTC
Member since:2005-09-21
Not likely. KHTML devs have done their own Javascript performance work. http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/3476
Too bad really to see this duplication of effort still going on, but lots of changes between the two engines have accumulated over the years...
Member since:
2005-11-07
Member since:2007-12-13
Member since:2007-08-24
Member since:2005-07-06
It is switching to Webkit by default for 2.23. Not that I can actually find any updated code for this since 2.22, it must be hiding somewhere private...2.22's Webkit backend basically works but leaves a lot to be desired (no extensions work with it, for instance, so no AdBlock).
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:2007-04-02
there is a google SoC application for a webkit kpart that you can use in konqueror http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/playground/libs/webkitkde/
Member since:2005-11-21
Another WebKit/Cocoa browser: Shiira
http://shiira.jp/en.php
Member since:2005-07-23
Member since:2006-01-10
Add Arora to Webkit.
http://code.google.com/p/arora/
There's also Swift, but it's not quite as far along as Arora.
http://try.swift.ws/
Member since:2005-11-02
How "major" do these have to be in order to be counted?
There's gtkhtml - does dillo use this, or another?
chimera2 has its own pretty bad enjine, but I admit it's ancient
HotJava has its own engine
Hv3 uses Tkhtml3
Do we count JS engines seperately? As we have seen, the JS engine just changed for webkit and may change for Gecko.
Do we count text mode browsers like links, lynx, w3m, etc?
Member since:
2006-02-05
Member since:2005-04-01
Member since:2006-02-05
You are right, it is amazing, and I have said as much in several places, including the second half of that post.
But since bad javascript means a bad experience on pretty much any website with any interactivity on it whatsoever, having bad javascript has been the big issue for webkit for quite awhile now. Now that it is being addressed, there isn't really all that much holding it back from world domination.
Member since:
2005-07-07
I ran the javascript speed test from here:
http://celtickane.com/webdesign/jsspeed.php
The results are amazing. My main browser is Epiphany 2.20. It is built against Firefox 2.0.0.14. I also have the latest nighly build of webkit installed with the latest version of Midori for testing. Epiphany/Gecko scores a pitiful 746ms in comparison with Midori/Webkit's 88ms. Now I have to install Firefox 3 to see how it compares on my machine.
These tests confirm the advantage:
http://www.jorendorff.com/articles/javascript/speed-test.html
Edited 2008-06-04 00:38 UTC
Member since:
2005-07-07
I forgot the Sunspider benchmarks. Here are the results:
Epiphany/Gecko
http://webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B...
Midori/Webkit
http://webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-results.html?%7B...
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:
2006-01-03
Member since:2005-10-13
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2006-07-26
It annoys me to death and I've given up on trying to educate the people I meet.
With the term "faster" people should use percentages. 60% faster....take 60% of the original and add that to the original.
With the term "as fast", ratios are good. 1.6 times as fast.
Using ratios with "faster" is weird. "0.6 times faster" appears like it is slower.
Member since:
2005-11-12
Member since:
2005-07-12