4 ms·
Credit to you for being able to do this, and it’s neat as a code golf kinda project. But I don’t understand the general obsession with small code size. What I r
by blowski 9y ago
Credit to you for being able to do this, and it’s neat as a code golf kinda project. But I don’t understand the general obsession with small code size. What I really care about is how well it performs - what kind of hardware does it work on? What’s the effect on the processors?
Code size is a signal, but the difference between loading a 1K and 10K file is invisible from an end user’s perspective, so I want to know about all these other factors, which are more visible.
- tipsee 9y agoNormally I have most my users in Asia (Myanmar/Malaysia) with just a few pageloads per session, so bytecount actually matters. I could inline this in an HTML page without feeling guilty.
- blowski 9y agoSo you’re concerned about their ridiculously slow (or capped) internet connections, but not about the impact on their CPUs or batteries, or visually how it performs?
- tipsee 9y agoI'm concerned with both, but the devices aren't nearly as bad as the internet speeds are. I tried to make a very simple draw cycle, did you find something that was very inefficient in the code?
- blowski 9y agoNot in the code, but it took a couple of seconds to render on an iPhone 6S and knocked quite a bit of the battery. If there were a 5K library that didn’t do that, I’d prefer the trade off of better performance for a larger file. Optimisations all have diminishing returns.
- tipsee 9y agoAha. The example doesn't have viewport set, so it renders at full resolution. I can update the example later.