WebViewFeedback VS FrameworkBenchmarks

You say that being web centric precludes usage on conventional gaming platforms. What about all the games that are PC only anyways? They could use Tauri or whatnot & have incredibly easy time porting to native.

Games such as Battlefield have already used web technology to power much of the game chrome. Taking this a step further doesn't seem like a real constraint. Microsoft themselves are working to extend fast performance webviews to Xbox uwp's. https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/WebView2Feedback/issues/215...

You're also not acknowledging the upside. Plenty of games would love to have an easy-to-make runs-anywhere multi-parryty game. Letting people log in from work or their phone could be a huge advantage to reaching markets. The market of people with access to web browsers is much bigger than the market of console owners!

You're also constraining your thinking to a narrow band in other ways, again ignoring plenty of great potential. Unreal has had huge success gaining entry into all kinds of unexpected spaces; cinema, architecture, events. Engines have a much wider market than just games, and having engines available on a much broader set of modalities than conventional game engines can unlock new use cases. No one's going to build a navigation tool requiring everyone to have a Steam Deck, but if all it takes is a phone then maybe that becomes interesting.

This also seems like an amazing starter kit for education and hobby coders. Wouldn't it be amazing to be able to be a year or two into learning development, and be able to create your own virtual world? That anyone can easily join & access from any device? That potential makes me thrilled.

Maybe this innovation isn't for you & you want to stick to conventional modalities. Fine, great! Don't use this. I for one see a lot of potential & reason for excitement. I think it has plenty of revenue potential, and vast amounts of cool potential.

Drag and drop is still broken in WebView2, so all blazor Maui drag and drop is broken. This is still not being fixed by MS https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/WebView2Feedback/issues/2805

Add Ons or Extensions with WebView2 (WebView2Feedback#98)

FIXED! RPG-254 Unbeknownst to me, Microsoft broke the toolbar on the WebView2 component that Sojour uses for displaying PDFs. The toolbar is now visible again and I have also fixed an odd threading issue, where once upon a time, opening a character sheet used to make that character sheet's window unresponsive for the first click. It's now responsive from the get-go.

Comment on the page point to a few GitHub issues for macOS and Linux support.

Linux: https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/WebView2Feedback/issues/645...

> Hey all - We don't currently have a timeline for when we would begin this work. Unfortunately it's very unlikely to be soon.

macOS: https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/WebView2Feedback/issues/131...

> No updates since @ningccn's comment above. We are continuing to make progress on Mac and haven't begun Linux planning yet.

"Microsoft Teams is getting big performance improvements".... but only for Windows!

Maybe some day we can have WebView2 in Linux[1] and others.

[1] https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/WebView2Feedback/issues/645

Got some traction over on GitHub, please post your comments there! Microsoft has acknowledged this issue and is tracking: https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/WebView2Feedback/issues/3136

Yep, and edge webview2 uses edge for the most part. Yet there's something specific to the edge webview2 runtime that makes it hard to port even if edge itself is already available on mac/linux. I think it's because it uses some windows specific APIs to expose functionalities that aren't available to regular webviews.

They were planning on maybe releasing the linux port around the end of 2021, as they were prioritizing the mac port first.

But I don’t think even the mac port has been released yet... So it kind of makes sense for the Teams team (ha!) to just not bother with a linux release if the runtime they are developing on isn't even on the release roadmap yet. Though I guess that makes the switch from electron even more confusing.

https://github.com/MicrosoftEdge/WebView2Feedback/issues/645

Neat. Thanks for sharing!

Interestingly, may-minihttp is faring very well in the TechEmpower benchmark [1], for whatever those benchmarks are worth. The code is also surprisingly straightforward [2].

[1] https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/

[2] https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/blob/mast...

ntex was formed after a schism in actix-web and Rust safety/unsafety, with ntex allowing more unsafe code for better performance.

ntex is at the top of the TechEmpower benchmarks, although those benchmarks are not apples-to-apples since each uses its own tricks: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=fortune&s...

Ruby is slow. Very slow. How much you may ask? https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=fortune&s... fastest Ruby entry is at 272th place. Sure, top entries tend to have questionable benchmark-golfing implementations, but it gives you a good primer on the overhead imposed by Ruby.

It is also not early 00s anymore, when you pick an interpreted language, you are not getting "better productivity and tooling". In fact, most interpreted languages lag behind other major languages significantly in the form of JS/TS, Python and Ruby suffering from different woes when it comes to package management and publishing. I would say only TS/JS manages to stand apart with being tolerable, and Python sometimes too by a virtue of its popularity and the amount of information out there whenever you need to troubleshoot.

If you liked Go but felt it being a too verbose to your liking, give .NET a try. I am advocating for it here on HN mostly for fun but it is, in fact, highly underappreciated, considered unsexy and boring while it's anything but after a complete change of trajectory in the last 3-5 years. It is actually the* stack people secretly want but simply don't know about because it is bundled together with Java in the public perception.

*productive CLI tooling, high performance, works well in a really wide range of workloads from low to high level, by far the best ORM across all languages and back-end framework that is easier to work with than Node.JS while consuming 0.1x resources

Although that seems to have improved in recent years.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=json§...

RoR and whatever C++ based web backend there is count as a valid comparison in my book. But comparing the languages itself is maybe a bit off.

On a side note, you can actually compare their performance here if you’re really curious. But take it with a grain of salt since these are synthetic benchmarks.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks

Most benchmarks you'll find essentially have someone's thumb on the scale (intentionally or unintentionally). Most people won't know the different languages well enough to create comparable implementations and if you let different people create the implementations, cheating happens. The TechEmpower benchmarks aren't bad, but many implementations put their thumb on the scale (https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks). For example, a lot of the Go implementations avoid the GC by pre-allocating/reusing structs or allocate arrays knowing how big they need to be in advance (despite that being against the rules). At some point, it becomes "how many features have you turned off." Some Go http routers (like fasthttp and those built off it like Atreugo and Fiber) aren't actually correct and a lot of people in the Go community discourage their use, but they certainly top the benchmarks. Gin and Echo are usually the ones that are well-respected in the Go community.

There is certainly a lot of speculation in Techempower benchmarks and top entries can utilize questionable techniques like simply writing a byte array literal to output stream instead of constructing a response, or (in the past) DB query coalescing to work around inherent limitations of the DB in case of Fortunes or DB quries.

And yet, the fastest Ruby entry is at 274th place while Rails is at 427th.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=fortune&s...

oh what machine? with how many workers? doing what?

search for "node" on this page: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21

JustJS would like a word https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r20&tes...

In terms of RPS, this web service is more-or-less the fortunes benchmark in the techempower benchmarks, once the data hits the cache: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21

Or, at least, they would be after applying optimizations to them.

In short, both of these would serve more rps than you will likely ever need on even the lowest end virtual machines. The underlying API provider will probably cut you off from querying them before you run out of RPS.