4 ms·

Removing jQuery is a curious and unproductive goal to have. You should focus on things that really matter to your users. You should also remove drupal (bloated

Removing jQuery is a curious and unproductive goal to have. You should focus on things that really matter to your users. You should also remove drupal (bloated and low security cms based on php), that's making your site ways more slow than jQuery

untog 8y ago
Your users care about page load time. If you can remove jQuery then the page will load faster. Users do not care if your CMS is bloated and written in PHP.
- js4ever 8y ago
  Bloated cms means slow server response time. So users will care
  - untog 8y ago
    Not if you have a caching layer, which any site of reasonable volume does.
    - js4ever 8y ago
      How do you cache POST actions? Login, create account, search, purchase, ...? All those actions go through the bloated cms It's not unusual to see 1000 to 3000 ms response time on drupal, joomla and wordpress
      - Kimitri 8y ago
        Umm... Well, you obviously can’t cache POST actions but you usually can cache a lot of the stuff in the response. The cache system in Drupal 8 is pretty awesome - especially when backed by Memcache or Redis. I’d say it’s quite easy to build slow sites on any platform. I also know it’s very well achievable to build truly perfomant sites on Drupal. Also, with the sites built on top of these CMSs, performance very rarely actually becomes an issue. The number one worry with the sites is their unmaintained codebase and all the security implications that come with it. I really like Drupal 8 and I certainly wouldn’t call it bloated. It’s extremely modular and you can enable just the things you need. What I really want, though, is that people would take better care of the sites they build on it.
woah 8y ago
Drupal will have no impact on site speed if it is behind a caching proxy
- js4ever 8y ago
  Except when you don't do cached actions (all POST, like search, create an account, login, purchase, ...) So drupal is not an issue when you serve static content.
setquk 8y ago
As someone who has used jQuery on one project for about 10 years I disagree. Some big problems: 1. Upgrading jQuery has been hell over the years. Literally every time something wierd breaks. Major version like the 2.0 transition meant major rewrites. 2. Most of the plugins seem to of varying quality between dire and just about usable but even the best we used died and got abandoned. I've had to fork, maintain and fix a load and then most of the contributors of those plugins don't know or care about updates or forks or pull requests or are total assholes so we're doomed to maintain them forever. 4. It is terribly slow in some circumstances. You don't know this until you find some client who is using a Citrix terminal deployment and is forced to use some tail end supported version of IE. And they are the loudest complainers. 5. It's pretty difficult to get rid of it. The tentacles are right in there. That monkey is on your back forever. 6. It's huge. Core isn't but by the time you've dragged in everything in via plugins to be productive you've got a meg of insecure god knows what crap running on your front end. Regardless of the progress in browser tech, having your stuff run like ass, which it will in the future (I know after 10 years), because it's easy and convenient is just wrong.
bvoran 8y ago
The goal isn't to remove one thing or the other. The goal is to improving page load time and speeding up JS rendering time. We just got to a point where jQuery was something we could do without.
- nobody271 8y ago
  Removing jQuery would definitely improve your page loading time for a lot of reasons. You're getting rid of all those plugins you were talking about plus you get rid of jQuery itself which I remember being like 12,000 Kb? Plus as jQuery fades out there will be fewer and fewer people with your exact version of jQuery, from the exact same CDN (of which there are more now too), which would lower the chances of it already being cached. I'd like to add on to your main point. Improving page loading speed is a major issue for some places. I've seen one and instead of fixing the issue (their awesome home made DAL) they did all kinds of things several orders of magnitute smaller in terms of the amount of time they took. Now maybe they had some hidden reason for the way they were doing things, idk. My point, if I have one, is to pay attention to what's causing the page to load slow.
kbumsik 8y ago
> bloated and low security cms based on php I have zero knowledge on Drupal but is this true?
lousken 8y ago
bloated and low security - can't this be said about wordpress and joomla as well? what do you consider as light and high security php based CMS?
- js4ever 8y ago
  I consider all php based cms as bloated and low security So yes this include wordpress and joomla

untog 8y ago

Your users care about page load time. If you can remove jQuery then the page will load faster. Users do not care if your CMS is bloated and written in PHP.

js4ever 8y ago
Bloated cms means slow server response time. So users will care
- untog 8y ago
  Not if you have a caching layer, which any site of reasonable volume does.
  - js4ever 8y ago
    How do you cache POST actions? Login, create account, search, purchase, ...? All those actions go through the bloated cms It's not unusual to see 1000 to 3000 ms response time on drupal, joomla and wordpress
    - Kimitri 8y ago
      Umm... Well, you obviously can’t cache POST actions but you usually can cache a lot of the stuff in the response. The cache system in Drupal 8 is pretty awesome - especially when backed by Memcache or Redis. I’d say it’s quite easy to build slow sites on any platform. I also know it’s very well achievable to build truly perfomant sites on Drupal. Also, with the sites built on top of these CMSs, performance very rarely actually becomes an issue. The number one worry with the sites is their unmaintained codebase and all the security implications that come with it. I really like Drupal 8 and I certainly wouldn’t call it bloated. It’s extremely modular and you can enable just the things you need. What I really want, though, is that people would take better care of the sites they build on it.

woah 8y ago

Drupal will have no impact on site speed if it is behind a caching proxy

js4ever 8y ago
Except when you don't do cached actions (all POST, like search, create an account, login, purchase, ...) So drupal is not an issue when you serve static content.

setquk 8y ago

As someone who has used jQuery on one project for about 10 years I disagree. Some big problems: 1. Upgrading jQuery has been hell over the years. Literally every time something wierd breaks. Major version like the 2.0 transition meant major rewrites. 2. Most of the plugins seem to of varying quality between dire and just about usable but even the best we used died and got abandoned. I've had to fork, maintain and fix a load and then most of the contributors of those plugins don't know or care about updates or forks or pull requests or are total assholes so we're doomed to maintain them forever. 4. It is terribly slow in some circumstances. You don't know this until you find some client who is using a Citrix terminal deployment and is forced to use some tail end supported version of IE. And they are the loudest complainers. 5. It's pretty difficult to get rid of it. The tentacles are right in there. That monkey is on your back forever. 6. It's huge. Core isn't but by the time you've dragged in everything in via plugins to be productive you've got a meg of insecure god knows what crap running on your front end. Regardless of the progress in browser tech, having your stuff run like ass, which it will in the future (I know after 10 years), because it's easy and convenient is just wrong.

bvoran 8y ago

The goal isn't to remove one thing or the other. The goal is to improving page load time and speeding up JS rendering time. We just got to a point where jQuery was something we could do without.

nobody271 8y ago
Removing jQuery would definitely improve your page loading time for a lot of reasons. You're getting rid of all those plugins you were talking about plus you get rid of jQuery itself which I remember being like 12,000 Kb? Plus as jQuery fades out there will be fewer and fewer people with your exact version of jQuery, from the exact same CDN (of which there are more now too), which would lower the chances of it already being cached. I'd like to add on to your main point. Improving page loading speed is a major issue for some places. I've seen one and instead of fixing the issue (their awesome home made DAL) they did all kinds of things several orders of magnitute smaller in terms of the amount of time they took. Now maybe they had some hidden reason for the way they were doing things, idk. My point, if I have one, is to pay attention to what's causing the page to load slow.

kbumsik 8y ago

> bloated and low security cms based on php I have zero knowledge on Drupal but is this true?

lousken 8y ago

bloated and low security - can't this be said about wordpress and joomla as well? what do you consider as light and high security php based CMS?

js4ever 8y ago
I consider all php based cms as bloated and low security So yes this include wordpress and joomla