3 ms·
Tauri, while an improvement on some aspects, is still a webapp in a shell. But it has the problem that you have to deal with browser specific quirks. From what
by jatins 5y ago
Tauri, while an improvement on some aspects, is still a webapp in a shell. But it has the problem that you have to deal with browser specific quirks.
From what I understand, this will avoid that problem by compiling to whatever native platform you are building for? Also it'd not just be a webapp in a shell.
- imbnwa 5y agoIf by browser specific quirks you mean having to deal with Webkit as Windows is Chromium now.
- OJFord 5y agoWell, Tauri (or more specifically the 'ri' part: https://github.com/tauri-apps/wry/ https://github.com/tauri-apps/wry/) uses different engines on different platforms, so I assume there's the potential for quirks.
- OJFord 5y agoYes, correct I think on all counts. I was just responding to the Electron comparison, saying if that's what you want, maybe look at Tauri, because it's also 'a webapp in a shell'. For some people in some senses, there's a big advantage to the 'webapp in a shell' model, because HTML/CSS is considered good, or WhizzBang.js is the familiar tool for building UIs, or whatever. I didn't mean to say it's better (or worse) than this - it's just quite a different (more similar to Electron) approach, that'll suit some and not others.