3 ms·

This seems to be such a pedantic discussion all around. Well, what did you mean by more efficient if not more performant, the usual metric? More efficient to d

This seems to be such a pedantic discussion all around. Well, what did you mean by more efficient if not more performant, the usual metric? More efficient to develope? Possible, depending on the devs skill set, but hardly relevant for the end user who want to play the game on possible low performant hardware? Oh and I think wasm can beat java in several cases.

bayindirh 3y ago
> This seems to be such a pedantic discussion all around. No, as a high performance software developer, my aim was not to devolve the discussion into a pedantic "stone throw". > Well, what did you mean by more efficient if not more performant, the usual metric? Watt per instruction. IOW, power consumption. As a person who lives in HPC world, inefficiency is bane of my existence. Two software can be equally performant while having different power profiles. I'm focusing on power. What does this brings, you may say. Throttling is the simple answer. If you waste more power, you'll hit the throttling wall faster, use more battery, and will lower the quality of the experience. From your phone to biggest supercomputers have thermal budgets, and none of them are unhittable. > but hardly relevant for the end user who want to play the game on possible low performant hardware? Not all of us have latest processors, tons of RAM, and JS microbenchmarks show that browser JS engines have wildly different performance characteristics for some loads. Using a native platform pushes these concerns out of the picture. > Oh and I think wasm can beat java in several cases. Have no experience with that, need to test and see.
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  "Using a native platform pushes these concerns out of the picture." Well yes, but this project was made with java. And by now I don't think java is more performant or efficient than the browser. In general, as you are surely aware, if you are looking for the most efficient solution, than obviously neither java nor the web is the right plattform. But for a casual game, both is fine.

bayindirh 3y ago

> This seems to be such a pedantic discussion all around. No, as a high performance software developer, my aim was not to devolve the discussion into a pedantic "stone throw". > Well, what did you mean by more efficient if not more performant, the usual metric? Watt per instruction. IOW, power consumption. As a person who lives in HPC world, inefficiency is bane of my existence. Two software can be equally performant while having different power profiles. I'm focusing on power. What does this brings, you may say. Throttling is the simple answer. If you waste more power, you'll hit the throttling wall faster, use more battery, and will lower the quality of the experience. From your phone to biggest supercomputers have thermal budgets, and none of them are unhittable. > but hardly relevant for the end user who want to play the game on possible low performant hardware? Not all of us have latest processors, tons of RAM, and JS microbenchmarks show that browser JS engines have wildly different performance characteristics for some loads. Using a native platform pushes these concerns out of the picture. > Oh and I think wasm can beat java in several cases. Have no experience with that, need to test and see.

hutzlibu 3y ago
"Using a native platform pushes these concerns out of the picture." Well yes, but this project was made with java. And by now I don't think java is more performant or efficient than the browser. In general, as you are surely aware, if you are looking for the most efficient solution, than obviously neither java nor the web is the right plattform. But for a casual game, both is fine.