Comment by izacus

Comment by izacus 2 days ago

14 replies

And yet whole of HN is VERY VERY angry because Google won't ship that pile of C++ into most popular software (and app framework) in the world.

usrnm 2 days ago

The most popular software in question is also a giant pile of C++, btw.

mort96 2 days ago

Mozilla's position for some time now has been, "we aren't opposed to shipping JXL support, but we'd want to ship a decent implementation in a memory safe language, not the reference C++ implementation". That position hasn't been met with very much criticism.

Google's position, on the other hand, has been a flat-out "no, we will not ship JXL". That's what has been met with criticism. Not an imagined reluctance to shipping a C++ JXL implementation.

ux266478 2 days ago

Who is saying Google should ship the reference implementation? It's a standard, and Google has the labor to write their own implementation.

  • jeffbee 2 days ago

    Google did write one. They wrote the bad one that we're discussing.

  • izacus 2 days ago

    That sounds like an even more request for someone to do for free, doesn't it?

    • ipdashc 2 days ago

      It's Google, it's one of the biggest tech companies in the world making boatloads of money, in part off their browser. They're currently best known as one of the companies trying to create AI God. They really can't write an... image format parser?

      • izacus a day ago

        Cool, but why does that mean they need to write a codec for you for free?