5 ms·

HN doesn't paginate comments any more. Here's a thread with 970 comments for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14023198 https://news.ycombinator.c

HN doesn't paginate comments any more. Here's a thread with 970 comments for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14023198 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14023198

ihuman 10y ago
When did they make that change? A month ago or so, I remember having to click a link at the bottom of a page to load more comments.
- cookiecaper 10y ago
  Same. I think that they enable it on a case-by-case basis as load gets high. Also, the "Who's hiring?" threads do not typically spawn active subthreads, so that may make them more cacheable/easier to load.
- eriknstr 10y ago
  I've been on HN for a long time (this is not my first account even) but I had completely forgotten about pagination on HN. Even when you talked about it I only get a vague feeling that I've seen it ever. Probably I have seen it but still it feels like the sort of memory that one has of something that didn't actually happen but which you have a "memory" of because someone told you it happened. I guess I usually simply stop scrolling before I get to the very bottom of HN. Just to be clear though, are we talking about a "next" link at the bottom of the page, or Reddit-style "continue" links for subtrees of comments beyond a certain depth?
1wd 10y ago
And the comments on that page (840kB) are smaller than the Javascript on a discourse site (4MB).
- codinghorror 10y ago
  yes, but the minute you click a _second_ page, the Javascript app is already loaded, and we request only JSON for the new data. Also this 4MB number isn't correct; I count 700kb. Feel free to double check my work: http://imgur.com/a/gPiEb http://imgur.com/a/gPiEb
  - aleyan 10y ago
    Are you really arguing that Discourse's superior linear complexity outweighs the huge constant cost in any meaningfull scenario? At 4mb/840kb * 970 comments, disregarding any additional JSON data that Discourse loads, a Discourse thread would need to have 4974 comments before its strategy is more efficient than Hackernews. Jeff, I respect you, but I don't understand where you are going with that comeback.
    - accountyaccount 10y ago
      I'm sure they could get that 4mb down if they removed all text formatting, media, quotes, replies, editing tools, user icons, and pagination.
    - hashhar 10y ago
      There's a lot of other things Discourse threads have (media, collapsing, proper markdown, editing toolbars etc.).
      - mattmanser 10y ago
        HN has collapsable threads and uses tables for layout, which aren't exactly efficient markdown, so makes the opposite point you're trying to make. Namely, even with bloody awful markdown, HN still delivers 1000 comments in 1/4 of the bytes. Another interesting idea, as almost everyone doesn't actually comment, wouldn't it make more sense to load the editor javascript dynamically? As far as I know, the silent majority read comments but never reply. In fact, I vaguely remember Jeff even having a blog post that most people never participate, they just consume (could be wrong!). Also, I haven't kept up with it, but mobile browsers used to have fairly aggressive cache invalidation to save space on the phone, so serving big chunks of JavaScript in the hope it might get reused one day wasn't actually a great idea.
        codinghorror 10y ago
        > Namely, even with bloody awful markdown, HN still delivers 1000 comments in 1/4 of the bytes. Are you sure this is correct? I count 700kb of total content (including the actual HTML and CSS), not 4mb, so I think your comments are premised on a number that's off by almost 6X? http://imgur.com/a/gPiEb http://imgur.com/a/gPiEb

HN doesn't paginate comments any more. Here's a thread with 970 comments for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14023198 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14023198

ihuman 10y ago

When did they make that change? A month ago or so, I remember having to click a link at the bottom of a page to load more comments.

cookiecaper 10y ago
Same. I think that they enable it on a case-by-case basis as load gets high. Also, the "Who's hiring?" threads do not typically spawn active subthreads, so that may make them more cacheable/easier to load.
eriknstr 10y ago
I've been on HN for a long time (this is not my first account even) but I had completely forgotten about pagination on HN. Even when you talked about it I only get a vague feeling that I've seen it ever. Probably I have seen it but still it feels like the sort of memory that one has of something that didn't actually happen but which you have a "memory" of because someone told you it happened. I guess I usually simply stop scrolling before I get to the very bottom of HN. Just to be clear though, are we talking about a "next" link at the bottom of the page, or Reddit-style "continue" links for subtrees of comments beyond a certain depth?

1wd 10y ago

And the comments on that page (840kB) are smaller than the Javascript on a discourse site (4MB).

codinghorror 10y ago
yes, but the minute you click a _second_ page, the Javascript app is already loaded, and we request only JSON for the new data. Also this 4MB number isn't correct; I count 700kb. Feel free to double check my work: http://imgur.com/a/gPiEb http://imgur.com/a/gPiEb
- aleyan 10y ago
  Are you really arguing that Discourse's superior linear complexity outweighs the huge constant cost in any meaningfull scenario? At 4mb/840kb * 970 comments, disregarding any additional JSON data that Discourse loads, a Discourse thread would need to have 4974 comments before its strategy is more efficient than Hackernews. Jeff, I respect you, but I don't understand where you are going with that comeback.
  - accountyaccount 10y ago
    I'm sure they could get that 4mb down if they removed all text formatting, media, quotes, replies, editing tools, user icons, and pagination.
  - hashhar 10y ago
    There's a lot of other things Discourse threads have (media, collapsing, proper markdown, editing toolbars etc.).
    - mattmanser 10y ago
      HN has collapsable threads and uses tables for layout, which aren't exactly efficient markdown, so makes the opposite point you're trying to make. Namely, even with bloody awful markdown, HN still delivers 1000 comments in 1/4 of the bytes. Another interesting idea, as almost everyone doesn't actually comment, wouldn't it make more sense to load the editor javascript dynamically? As far as I know, the silent majority read comments but never reply. In fact, I vaguely remember Jeff even having a blog post that most people never participate, they just consume (could be wrong!). Also, I haven't kept up with it, but mobile browsers used to have fairly aggressive cache invalidation to save space on the phone, so serving big chunks of JavaScript in the hope it might get reused one day wasn't actually a great idea.
      - codinghorror 10y ago
        > Namely, even with bloody awful markdown, HN still delivers 1000 comments in 1/4 of the bytes. Are you sure this is correct? I count 700kb of total content (including the actual HTML and CSS), not 4mb, so I think your comments are premised on a number that's off by almost 6X? http://imgur.com/a/gPiEb http://imgur.com/a/gPiEb