4 ms·
I think i'd prefer something native.
by lawless123 10y ago
I think i'd prefer something native.
- JepZ 10y agoWhy? I mean WebGL has hardware acceleration, modern JS is quite fast. Is it just about performance or is there anything else?
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoJS is still slower than native code, and has worse memory consumption.
- rubber_duck 10y agoEven disregarding JS vs. native, WebGL has a big perf overhead because it's sand boxing API calls
- baldfat 10y agoElectron apps can work great. I have noticed a general bias against all Electron apps and I think it is because of how poorly Atom performed when it was first released. Virtual Studio Code, and RStudio are shinning examples of a good Electron App.
- problems 10y agoI've run many other Electron apps - they all suffer from the same problems. Ugly non-native UI, DPI scaling that doesn't quite work right, poor platform integration and massive binaries. Additionally, with something like this, I'd imagine it would be quite possible to port to a simple Node based system with OpenGL support without the need to embed a browser. Would probably improve performance too due to removed sandboxing.
- z3t4 10y agothere are no node based systems with opengl support.
- problems 10y agoThere's a node-webgl package which provides all of the OpenGL ES features with no need for the web browser part, there's also SDL and GLFW bindings available. While it's not full OpenGL - I couldn't find any well maintained GL bindings at least - it should be completely sufficient to port a WebGL project.
- z3t4 10y agoI've searched a lot for such a package, most are five years old and doesn't work. Best I could find was the x11 package, but most examples doesn't work. And if you go with a wrapper you could as well use Electron or nw.js witch I'm using atm.