4 ms·
JavaScript is an assembly language. Uh, no. Not at all. Not even close. This is a ridiculous premise, and can't possibly be taken as a supporting argument for
by sc68cal 15y ago
JavaScript is an assembly language.
Uh, no. Not at all. Not even close. This is a ridiculous premise, and can't possibly be taken as a supporting argument for ANYTHING.
Also - Has the author not heard of compression? Especially since Google uses that as a site metric for rankings?
There is no need to "tighten up"* a page if the output is going to be compressed before transmission to the client.
* This assumes sane markup
- ecubed 15y agoI find your comment on "tightening up" before page compression interesting as I'd never heard that logic before, not discounting it though. Does doing minification before compression schemes such as mod_gzip or mod_deflate really not make much of a difference? I'd be interested in seeing a side by side comparison when put in this context.
- sc68cal 15y agoThe simplest and biggest space saver that minification does is remove excess whitespace and newlines. Compression schemes do the exact same thing, as well as compress all the other characters used in the source. Yes, the browser will have to decompress and the whitespaces will be included in the parsing step for the javascript engine, but at this point we're deep in the weeds. The biggest driver of speed for web pages is the network.
- tzs 15y agoI tested this with jQuery: 236k jQuery not minified, not compressed 91k jQuery minified, not compressed 68k jQuery not minified, compressed with gzip 32k jQuery minified, compressed with gzip Looks like minifying is still a substantial savings, even if it is going to be send compressed.
- sc68cal 15y agoThere is nothing like hard numbers. Thanks!