Yeah, I think that's fair. I don't think about resource utilization in a vacuum: native apps require I develop three different apps and likely have a lot of CGO dependencies. With Wails and the OS WebView the same client you're used to using on MacOS should work the same or similarly on Linux and Windows within reason. They should also all maintain similar resource utilization profiles. That's why I said it's limited in its footprint, I'm not here to compete with native library performance and native library performance isn't trying to compete with my ability to cross-compile.
Process PID Avg CPU Footprint (MiB)
------------------------------ ------ --------- ---------------
Cascade 45314 0.46% 73.0
WebKit WebContent 45349 0.50% 392.9
WebKit GPU 45347 <0.01% 26.1
WebKit Networking 45348 0.02% 6.5
Nick completer plugin 45344 <0.01% 2.8
Nickname colors plugin 45345 <0.01% 9.7
ThemeWidget service 41353 <0.01% 10.1
SafariPlatformSupport helper 41355 <0.01% 13.1
------------------------------ ------ --------- ---------------
Total 1.00% 534.2
I'm currently connected to four networks for 6 days and 18 hours. Compared to other native apps on the same system: App Main PID Uptime Avg CPU Main MiB Total MiB
------------ -------- ------------ ------- -------- ---------
Cascade 45314 6d 17h 45m 1.52% 73.0 556.8
Proton Drive 22091 11d 04h 32m 0.15% 48.0 65.1
Ghostty 78285 27d 22h 03m <0.01% 173.6 184.2
Finder 1308 34d 19h 32m 0.05% 104.4 104.4
so, if I rewrote the application into three separate applications I could probably save ~200 MiB of memory footprint. I'll look into my ability to slim down the memory utilization but some chunk of this is probably the message buffer of each channel.