Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by small_scombrus 67 days ago
It isn't web based? It's a set of Lua scripts that run locally
1 comments

They are saying web based solutions often out perform LÖVE, even though you would expect the opposite because LÖVE doesn't have the bloat of a browser engine.
Browser engines are probably some of the most optimized pieces of software in existence, so it doesn't surprise me at all.
Love2D uses Luajit and directly calls established game libraries. The CPU usage should be far better for 2D games, luajit is faster than a browser's javascript jit. You can also create single exe games that are a few megabytes and not a few hundred megabytes.
Optimized abstraction layer is still an abstraction layer. The web is like two or three of those.
Explain this to electron haters.
Browser engines are optimized for displaying web pages, not for applications.

60MB+ for a calculator is not optimal.

explain that to my webgl TypeScript browser game running at 180+ FPS while rendering a large RPG tiled world with infinite procedurally JIT generated biomes, with heavy processing delegated to webworkers.
As you aren't posting code or stats I can't say much, but I'd bet a native app would still be smaller and more efficient, since you have to wrap what you're doing in an entire Chromium instance and deal with a web stack designed for documents, which is definitionally less efficient than a native alternative. Tiles aren't exactly cutting edge technology.

"Heavy processing delegated to webworkers?" That just sounds like threads but worse.

Meanwhile that same computer could probably run Counter Strike at 400 FPS.
step 1 htop

there isnt step 2, explain is over