Personally, I’m skeptical that WebComponents are inherently better. To use WebComponents in a real application, you are going to need to access the DOM a lot (whether it’s true DOM or shadow DOM, it’s still DOM). To my mind that has to be much slower than accessing plain JS.
One of the big advantages to Royale as I see it is that we’re treating HTML and CSS as nothing more than a rendering engine. We’re only using the DOM for rendering and very little else. The vast majority of the code remains in the pure JS engine which has an advantage both in terms of memory footprint, and speed of execution. A quick search turned up this which seems to indicate that Web Component rendering is slow when compared to native.[1] Royale rendering should be very close to (or better than) native. (The reason I say “better than” is because HTML parsing takes measurable time. Royale apps add DOM elements directly, so there’s no (or very little) HTML parsing required.) Either way, Royale is free to use the DOM as an engine in any way it likes. If Web Components turn out to be the best, Royale can take advantage of that. My $0.02, Harbs [1]https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46431688/web-components-rendering-performance <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46431688/web-components-rendering-performance> > On Feb 25, 2019, at 5:44 PM, Olaf Krueger <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > since a longer period of time I am struggling with me and the question: > > "Does it still makes sense to use whatever (huge) framework in order to > build data-driven enterprise (web) applications these days?" > > For me, the benefits of using a framework like Royale should be: > Independence, productivity and "multi-platform". > But what price do we have to pay for this? Will we ever harvest the fruits > of dealing with those extra layers and abstractions in order to get a future > proof framework? > Will there be any other important target than the web during the upcoming > decade at all? > Does the usage of a framework really increase productivity when we consider > the overall balance? > > On the other side, web technologies are evolving constantly: > WebComponents are growing, they can be used already, it's a reality! > WebAssembly is already a kind of non-UI-cross-platform coding in native > speed, you can use C++, C# and some more other languages already. > WebAssembly and WebComponents can be used together already. > That means that decoupled HTML/CSS components on the UI side could be > probably combined with using a typed language for the business logic. > AFAIK, the DOM manipulation performance from WebAssembly is not perfect yet, > but we can expect that it will evolve. > > However, just the usage of WebComponents brings a lot of the advantages that > we are used to having with Flex or Royale/asjs: > You can build reusable, decoupled components. WebComponents are using its > own Shadow DOM and own CSS. > All that by using web standards. > There is already a significant amount of WebComponents available… and it’s > growing [1]. > > WebAssembly and WebComponents could be probably used together with Royale or > other frameworks, but the question to me is: > Doesn't these technologies already provide most of the things which we'd > like to have as an application developer? > > You are so high-skilled guys here and I am really interested in your opinion > on this! > > Thanks, > Olaf > > [1] http://webcomponents.org > > > > -- > Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
