The back/forward cache is from apple era webkit, as is a large amount of the basic compat work in webkit.

KHTML did a lot of work, but they did not do all of the stuff that made WebKit actually practical as a browser engine - webkit had massive rewrites to get compatibility and performance to anything approaching acceptable.

That said the problem I had here in this article was that this article is explicitly crediting a specific feature that predates Chrome to Chrome. The bf-cache is one of the vast amounts of work webkit had done to make khtml a practical engine for real browsing.

WebKit at the point chrome forked it had already largely rewritten the DOM, JS engine, Rendering engine, and layout engine.

Or you can continue searching HN to make glib questionably accurate and definitely misleading comments in response to things I say because you’re unhappy that someone suggested opencl failed because it was a crappy spec.

Konqueror/KHTML was more than "acceptable". It was a fine web browsing experience. You'd barely notice anything wrong with it and it was the first browser to pass ACID 2 tests I think.

Saying KHTML wasn't viable/acceptable experience is more misleading to be honest.

It looks like KDE is still to this day a primary contributor. Isn't giving Apple credit for the work of a large team, the same thing OP was doing with Chrome?

Regarding your accusation, I'll make sure to check who I am replying to and not reply to you anymore. I guess you have interesting counter arguments that encourage discourse. Anyways, keep posting, you're doing a great job.