4 ms·
It's worth noting that those 400 lines are not what's sent over the wire. Generally, you'll send something like this as a little snippet of JSON then tear it a
by jasonkester 16y ago
It's worth noting that those 400 lines are not what's sent over the wire. Generally, you'll send something like this as a little snippet of JSON then tear it apart on the client and construct whatever HTML you need to render it nicely.
I suspect the author had a look in Firebug and came to the wrong conclusion.
So no, it's not bloat. It's just presentation.
- masklinn 16y ago> So no, it's not bloat. It's just presentation. The overly complex and messy generation of crappy HTML is bloat.
- msy 16y agoJust because it's only presentation doesn't mean it's not bloat. Assuming this is a rendered JSON object that's still a ton of extra HTML elements and CSS to render/instantiate than should be necessary to produce the same effect and while that might not be noticeable on your top-end MBP with safari for a lot of devices it does. It's also just poor craftmanship, I think that's what really bugs me.
- falien 16y agoIt would be bloat if, as the author irresponsibly implies, all it did was display the basic data of a single text message. In the case of that single instance for the author it may do that (I didn't care to look that closely), but it provides for much more to be possibly displayed, and much of that presentation can provide extra information to a viewer (or a machine for that matter). Also with modern javascript and html engine optimization, its not out of the realm of possibility that generating all of this every time is faster than only generating exactly what is required for each message.