That said, i'm not impressed. A web-based solution is usually better performing, despite all the bloatware necessary. This says a lot about the state of software development unfortunately.
This is a bit of an apples to oranges scenario, because the algorithm and architecture is not exactly the same, despite the game functioning identical.
The main weak points of LÖVE that we hit were mainly around embedded video playback though, which is probably very well optimized in chromium.
https://love2d.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=94760
It's unfortunate as Love2D is generally VERY snappy on x86. I used it on a 300MHz laptop back in the day.
Open source is not a one-way street. By publicly disparaging open source projects, you're actually harming the ecosystem you rely on.
60MB+ for a calculator is not optimal.
"Heavy processing delegated to webworkers?" That just sounds like threads but worse.
but webgl + web workers is good enough these days.
I can't share code sorry, the project got big and I have commercial plans.
But you can tell Gemini 3.1, Opus 4.6 or GPT 5.4 High to generate a demo and they do a decent job most of the times.
that's how I got started, seeing how it was possible to have good game performance with multi threaded workloads on a browser.
And it isn't trauma, it's literal fact. Electron isn't used because it's technically superior to native applications, it's used because web devs are a dime a dozen. It's popular for business reasons, not technical reasons. It works "well enough," but only because computers are really fast but there's only so much slack an OS can take up when even parts of it are Electron apps, and probably vibe-coded to boot.
there isnt step 2, explain is over