sciter-js-sdk VS js-framework-benchmark

How tiny is the output? What is the API? (I couldn't find any documentation. I thought maybe it's in the Help menu in the app itself but all I found was this https://i.imgur.com/6puOMIe.png - On that note, what level of JS is supported? As far as I can tell it uses this https://github.com/c-smile/sciter-js-sdk which is based on Fabrice Bellard's QuickJS ) Is there sound?

JavaScript & Electron Sciter!

Having normal procedural language for build automation is of course useful. That's for those 10% of cases when "standard" build DSL (make,CMake,etc.) simply do not have facilities.

But the rest of 90% tasks should have compact (easily readable) definitions.

I personally found that Premake5 has quite good balance for these tasks.

Premake files are plain .lua files and due to Lua syntax they are easily readable. And if needed you can call from them procedures defined in again Lua.

So typical project (multiplatform) definition looks pretty readable, for example one project from Sciter SDK:

https://github.com/c-smile/sciter-js-sdk/blob/main/premake5....

More details.

That's why in Sciter I've extended JSX with translation meta instruction @:

Note Tauri is full fledged Client/Server with WebView (client) is running in separate process with RPC between UI process and Rust code (Server).

For the comparison:

Standalone Sciter (scapp.exe, https://github.com/c-smile/sciter-js-sdk/tree/main/bin) takes ~8 MB of RAM (with minimal Cairo and GDI backends).

That's 20 times less than even Tauri.

WebView based solutions are not suitable for applets - small portable desktop applications.

scapp.exe ( Standalone sciter engine ) takes 45 Mb showing its default "about" document.

It does support , with limited support but still.

See: https://github.com/c-smile/sciter-js-sdk/tree/main/samples/c...

Sciter also supports immediate mode painting on any element (like in DearIMGUI):

    element.paintBackground = function(gfx) {

JavaScript benchmarks are instruments for measuring the speed and effectiveness with which a JavaScript engine—such as the ones found in web browsers—can complete particular tasks. Benchmarks are used by developers and browser vendors to evaluate various engines, find places in the code where improvements are needed, and make sure JavaScript standards are being followed.

Strange then that frameworks advertise how fast they are at rendering, mutating, and creating objects in the DOM, and one of the main JS benchmarks everyone likes to measure their performance by is literally a benchmark about DOM manipulation: https://github.com/krausest/js-framework-benchmark

Oh wait. It's not strange. Because state manipulation is a largely solved problem, and even the least performant state manipulation is blazingly fast. However, presenting components in the browser's DOM is tens of magnitudes of orders less performant than anything you can throw at state manipulation.

And every single framework is busy solving one single problem: how do we touch the DOM as little as possible?

It literally says at the bottom "Data from https://krausest.github.io/js-framework-benchmark/"

The standard benchmark for js frameworks would be best: https://github.com/krausest/js-framework-benchmark