I know this isn't new for Japan, but this requirement caught my eye:

> Use memory-safe programming languages, or features that improve memory safety within other languages, within the alternative web browser engine at a minimum for all code that processes web content

Would Apple themselves meet this requirement? Isn't WebKit C++? Of course, I'm not sure what would be considered "features that improve memory safety within other languages," that's kind of vague.

▲

rafram 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/wiki/Safer-CPP-Guidelines

▲

hu3 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Documentation to guide devs on safe usage of C++ is enough?

So any language should be allowed as long as they instruct developers to be careful.

▲

resonious 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Compliance often works exactly like this.

▲

creato 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I don't know if they do this, but those conventions could be enforced by a tool.

▲

JimmyBiscuit 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Theres C++ in military airplanes, they just cut out 90% of the features: https://www.stroustrup.com/JSF-AV-rules.pdf

And heres a nice video about it: https://youtu.be/Gv4sDL9Ljww?si=Z4riPMKAKcIKaU0s

▲

dmazzoni 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, in WebKit, SaferCPP guidelines are enforced by a static analysis tool.

▲

jjmarr 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My work bans raw new and delete, so we only use unique_ptr. It's not as memory safe as Rust's borrow checker but I've never seen a segfault.

▲

concinds 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, they do this, and it's really not an unreasonable requirement.

▲

arcanemachiner 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Of course. It's just a coincidence that they're placing onerous restrictions on competi- I mean alternative browser engines. Restrictions which, of course, they're not obliged to follow themselves.

I am sure that Apple will make no other efforts to impede others from unwalling the garden. That would be completely ridiculous, and frankly, un-Apple-esque.

	▲	concinds 7 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Both Chrome and Firefox are already compliant, so I don't see it as onerous, but the full context of the list is indeed an extremely loud and clear "FUCK YOU, WE OWN YOU" to regulators and other browser vendors.
	▲	dagmx 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Which of the restrictions do you feel they don’t abide by? It looks like they meet all their own restrictions

▲

giancarlostoro 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I do wonder how long before Apple either replaces WebKit with something built in Swift, or starts slowly converting their browser engine to Swift.