This is completely out of touch with my worldview. I've lived in and around London my whole life and, while "see it say it sorted" is a common joke, I've never once heard someone say they dislike them
no need to roll your own solution. If you want to ship a game, go high level :D
For web native rendering pixijs is good for 2d (and phaser is good also a good entry level). For 3d theres threejs/babylonjs.
There's also unity, which some browser games use but it has downsides on web (large build sizes for one)
None of the networking solutions will give you unreal engine netcode developer productivity (and that includes ones for unity). I use colyseus, it doesnt solve everything but will save you some work
Re saturation, it definitely depends on the genre, web is its own market. What type of game are you thinking of making?
As long as you don't read your writes and use transform for animations it won't cost you more than 0.5ms to 1ms per frame (could it be better? Sure. But developer productivity is important.)
I use react in my game platform bloxd.io - which I work full time on - and I couldn't be happier
This isn't true! I've encountered many bugs in safari (fullscreen pointer lock not working on most html elements comes to mind), and they certainly do not value quality.
This just isn't true! There are so many features that have not been supported long after other browsers implemented them (webgl 2 comes to mind, though that is finally available - 4% of global web users still don't have support due to this, though!)
It's not just regex, it's a long list of features and bugs. The OP was simply giving an example. I've encountered many time-wasting bugs on safari in the past, which have simply been open for several years.
Music to my ears - from my own experience, safari is a pain to deal with. I've run into many bugs that haven't been fixed for years, and they've lagged behind in implementing standards like WebGL 2.
Hopefully this will force them to invest more resources into safari and webkit
I agree, if we had all started with it, it is nice. But it completely breaks backwards compatibility with the whole existing node.js ecosystem, costing countless developer hours. Backwards compatibility is a serious concern.
It seems very likely to me a solution could have been found that would allow node to support the combination of esm and cjs.
I agree, if we had all started with it, it is nice. But it completely breaks backwards compatibility with the whole existing node.js ecosystem, costing countless developer hours. It seems very likely to me a solution could have been found that would allow node to support the combination of esm and cjs.
I've spent a significant number of hours bashing my head against the same issue and reading tons of GitHub issue threads
It seems to come down to the es module spec being half baked so that it's not possible to implement them in a backward compatible way with the rest of the nodejs ecosystem
I'm not sure what the solution is, but I no longer use any packages which export only an es module.
I completely disagree with this as someone who's spent a significant number of hours bashing my head against the same issue and reading tons of GitHub issue threads
It seems to come down to the es module spec being half baked so that it's not possible to implement them in a backward compatible way with the rest of the nodejs ecosystem
I'm not sure what the solution is, but I no longer use any packages which export only an es module.