this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
478 points (99.4% liked)

Programmer Humor

27506 readers
1744 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 6nk06@sh.itjust.works 120 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Given these positive signals

Those idiots waited for 4 years because they followed the hype of the moment. I'm glad I removed Google from my life.

[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 51 points 1 day ago

This must be your first time seeing what Google support looks like

This is pretty standard unless you can get an exec’s personal attention.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 117 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

Given these positive signals, we would welcome contributions

Poor Google doesn't have the manpower to implement it. They can only accept contributions from volunteers.

[–] ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip 32 points 17 hours ago

Google is just a small indie company after all.

[–] bigfondue@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Don't worry, they can spare some 20 percent time

[–] eskuero@lemmy.fromshado.ws 81 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"we would welcome contributions to integrate a performant and memory-safe JPEG XL decoder in Chromium. In order to enable it by default in Chromium we would need a commitment to long-term maintenance."

yeah

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 9 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I.e. the existing implementation is not usable because it's not written in rust

[–] captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works 7 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Or would they demand it in Go? Or have they abandoned that?

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 3 points 16 hours ago

That might work but didn't think go was

  • as safe as rust
  • built for CPU intensive operations (aside from potentially concurrent tasks)
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 18 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

The name of the format makes me think it's regular jpeg, but bigger. Wouldn't it be better to be smaller? 🤔

[–] Cort@lemmy.world 22 points 21 hours ago

No. They increased the max "canvas" size and increased encoding efficiency. You'd want the file size to be smaller but the file itself to be larger (and consequently more detailed)

[–] bhamlin@lemmy.world 7 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

It's even more confusing than that; the X is for revision 10, and the L is for long term.

It's an update to the JPEG standard intended to cover expected future uses and capabilities.

[–] Brahvim@lemmy.kde.social 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

~~"10 LTS"?~~

[–] dormedas@lemmy.dormedas.com 12 points 1 day ago
load more comments
view more: next ›