3 ms·
>It's one of the most inefficient, slow, resource hungry app platforms that humanity has ever devised. Is it? JavaScript interpreters are crazy fast, almost c
by SquareWheel 3y ago
>It's one of the most inefficient, slow, resource hungry app platforms that humanity has ever devised.
Is it? JavaScript interpreters are crazy fast, almost comparable to compiled languages. The layout engines are powerful and efficient. They support extremely-optimized networking protocols and media formats.
It's not (currently) a great platform for high-poly 3D rendering and such, but who knows what the future holds with wasm and WebGPU.
Browsers do use a lot of memory, but so did Java, Flash, Shockwave, Silverlight, etc.
- illiarian 3y ago> Is it? It is. None of what you write is either fast or efficient. Especially not the layout engine that does a re-layout and a re-paint as soon as you look at it sideways I always say when people talk about efficiency: There's a reason you can't animate height: auto or a list item efficiently without hacks. As is the reason why opacity changes are outright banned on lower-end devices like TVs. The limitations of this system designed to display static text are such that a non-issue like quickly displaying scrolling text becomes a problem: https://code.visualstudio.com/blogs/2017/10/03/terminal-renderer https://code.visualstudio.com/blogs/2017/10/03/terminal-rend...
- thomaslord 3y agoA large part of the issue is the modern Javascript ecosystem too. The browser isn't the most efficient way to build apps, sure, but using a virtual DOM adds a whole extra layer of performance issues.
- illiarian 3y ago> but using a virtual DOM adds a whole extra layer of performance issues. You mean the fastest libraries like ivi use Virtual DOM ;) : https://twitter.com/RyanCarniato/status/1636120238638137344 https://twitter.com/RyanCarniato/status/1636120238638137344