[tokyodude]

I disagree with your disagreement :)

Electron (and nearly all retained mode GUIs) will execute 10x more code trying not to execute the rendering code. Just skipping all that checking and jumping to the rendering code is arguably a win in many many cases.

To put some empirical data on it, game devs use ImGUIs because they keep up with perf where as that 10x overhead of retained mode guis creating gui objects, deleting gui objects, marshaling data into and out of gui objects, adding and removing event handlers and callbacks, and then trying to write a bunch more code to optimize all of that never leads to a GUI that is performant enough for the GUIs needed for game dev.

I think if you check actual apps, especially phone apps, you'll find it's not so clear which one wins. Phone apps almost always move in relation to the users fingers meaning the screen is being re-rendered. Usually new GUI elements are moving on and off the top/bottom of the screen. The overhead of creating/deleting/managing those objects is arguably greater than just re-rendering. The screen is already going to be re-rendered. At best you're getting a few cached textures from your retained mode gui all at the expensive of managing GUI objects.

For desktop apps it really depends on the app. It's got nothing to do with the complexity of the UI and everything to do with what the app does. A text editor might be a win for a retained mode GUI. Photoshop/Maya it's less clear. For example Unity is ImGUI and has very complex UI. Much of the UI has to respond in realtime to the state of the user's document that is changing constantly.

[theamk]

> Electron (and nearly all retained mode GUIs) will execute 10x more code trying not to execute the rendering code. Just skipping all that checking and jumping to the rendering code is arguably a win in many many cases.

How do you figure? Rendering a single Truetype letter will have dozens of conditional branches, use complex floating point math, and touch tens of kilobytes of cache. And there are many thousands of them in the GUI. Even if you have rendered cache, there is still lots of memory pressure copying data back and forth.

Compared to that, retained mode GUIs should be much more efficient. Even 50 checks are nothing compared to ability to void rendering one line.

Note this is all predicated on screen being mostly unchanging. For example, as I am typing this comment, everything is stationary except for a single line where I am typing.

> The screen is already going to be re-rendered.

This is the key! As you said, if you have to re-render whole screen anyway, then retained mode GUIs will have to maintain draw state and re-render every element every time anyway -- a strictly worse performance.

But most of the regular apps, like editors and chat clients and web browsers, do not re-render whole screen every time. They only do one thing at a time.

For an empirical evidence, look at WinAPI design: this is a retained mode GUI, with lots of effort dedicated to figuring out invalidated rectangles and which controls need to be rendered. This was the only way to make a GUI which is performant enough.

[tokyodude]

And yet the WinAPI is not actually preformant for types of apps that an ImGUI excels at

There's best case for Retained mode GUIs and best case for ImGUIs. ImGUIs excel when lots is changing. In a scrolling mobile app the entire page is being re-rendered constantly as the user moves the page up and down. GUI widgets get created and deleted, data gets marshalled in and out, various algorithms are applied to try to minimize re-creating stuff, all code that doesn't need to be executed in ImGUI mode code.

There are tons of cases where ImGUIs win in perf. In fact the reason they are so popular with for game dev is exactly because they vastly out perform retained mode guis. There's a reason there are 100s of books and 1000s of blog posts and articles trying to get retained mode guis to run smoothly. They almost always fail without lots and lots of specialized client side code to try to minimize GUI widget object creation/deletion, reuse objects, minimize state changes, etc, all that code disappears in an ImGUI and they run at 60fps where as all the retained mode guis struggle to get even 20fps consistently as they hiccup and sputter.

[userbinator]

Phone apps almost always move in relation to the users fingers meaning the screen is being re-rendered.

I'm not really familiar with the mobile platforms, but given their reliance on battery power, I hope(!) that scrolling is done mostly in hardware and actual re-rendering happens only for areas beyond the scrolling boundary. Of course you will need to re-render when the actual content changes, but not with just scrolling.

To put some empirical data on it, game devs use ImGUIs because they keep up with perf where as that 10x overhead of retained mode guis creating gui objects, deleting gui objects, marshaling data into and out of gui objects, adding and removing event handlers and callbacks, and then trying to write a bunch more code to optimize all of that never leads to a GUI that is performant enough for the GUIs needed for game dev.

That sounds more like an implementation/application problem --- overuse of OOP or an application where too much is constantly changing --- rather than an inherent inefficiency of retained mode. The Windows native GUI, since Win16 in Windows 1.0, was basically designed for retained mode. Immediate mode is more common in games because it's more suited to that application.