4 ms·
This is cool–it's worth mentioning that you might be trading runtime performance for bundle size though, here's a contrived example to demonstrate: http://i.img
by dschnurr 9y ago
This is cool–it's worth mentioning that you might be trading runtime performance for bundle size though, here's a contrived example to demonstrate: http://i.imgur.com/38CR3Ws.jpg http://i.imgur.com/38CR3Ws.jpg
- evv 9y agoKeep in mind that everything is gzipped nowadays, so it may not make a big difference in network usage. Although it is still likely to cause some memory overhead
- franciscop 9y agoNo, I have done and pubpished an article about how gzip works with JS and the result will compress pretty well. Not better than the code, but I would guess within the same order of magnitude.
- vmasto 9y agoJavaScript parsing is still a huge bottleneck. 1mb of it will still take 1 whole second to parse in V8 (note: just to parse it, not actually evaluate or run it!).
- franciscop 9y agoI think this is (so far) for snippets. I agree otherwise though
- zupa-hu 9y agoIt's in beta stage, so that's not unexpected. They can easily add a cost function later that considers multiple parameters.