5 ms·
Figma does, and they cut their load time down by 3x. As a frequent user, I can attest to how snappy it feels despite the heavy computations it needs to do in th
by shrumm 6y ago
Figma does, and they cut their load time down by 3x. As a frequent user, I can attest to how snappy it feels despite the heavy computations it needs to do in the background. Evan Wallace, their CTO did a great write up on it [1].
[1] https://www.figma.com/blog/webassembly-cut-figmas-load-time-by-3x/ https://www.figma.com/blog/webassembly-cut-figmas-load-time-...
- k__ 6y agoI find it strange when people say "cut by 3 times" What they did was cutting it to 30% or by 70%.
- nicoburns 6y agoIt depends if you think additively or multiplicatively: newLoadTime = oldLoadTime - (70% of oldLoadTime) newLoadTime = oldLoadTime / 3 Personally I find the additive expression unintuitive and find the multiplicative expression easier to reason about. "cut by" does generally indicate an additive expression. It should really have been phrased as something like "reduced by a factor of 3"
- cedex12 6y agohum, aren't both of your assignments the same (modulo 3.3%) ?
- nicoburns 6y agoYes, that's my point. You can phrase the same computation in both ways.
- k__ 6y agoBut it isn't a factor.
- nicoburns 6y agoIt is. Factor, noun "a number or quantity that when multiplied with another produces a given number or expression." It's not an exact integer factor, but I think the concept of factor is more general than that.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- wongarsu 6y ago>It's not an exact integer factor That would imply the phrase has to be "reduced by a factor of 1/3", which leads to the wrong impression. The better technically correct phrase would be "reduced by a divisor of 3"
- the8472 6y agoIf you reduce it by a multiple > 1 of its total time it must be negative, i.e. it's giving you back CPU cycles every time you execute it. Quite impressive.