4 ms·
> The goal should be to try harder to use less code The goal is to deliver content and experiences that people actually want, it has nothing to do with the amo
by bengillies 9y ago
> The goal should be to try harder to use less code
The goal is to deliver content and experiences that people actually want, it has nothing to do with the amount of code at all.
At best, using less code might be a performance optimisation (though not always).
- tzahola 9y ago>The goal is to deliver content and experiences that people actually want Wrong. 99% of the time the goal is to sell ads. The tricky stuff is to bundle it with something that people actually want (or think they want).
- bengillies 9y agoSo we're both agreed then that the goal isn't to "use less code"? I get your point though, so I'll rephrase: > The goal should be to try harder to use less code Why is this the goal? At best it's a performance optimisation that some (probably most) sites could use to speed up time to render. But at the same time, there are many other sites where this doesn't make sense or for which the purpose isn't the traditional document based web that is sped up by removing JS. Why should sites that actually benefit from something like WebAssembly be limited just because other sites will use it and (continue to) be slow bug ridden monsters?