3 ms·
Is that 500k with or without gzip? With gzip, that would be huge. Either way there are certain techniques like bundle-splitting and hydration that will probabl
by brundolf 5y ago
Is that 500k with or without gzip? With gzip, that would be huge.
Either way there are certain techniques like bundle-splitting and hydration that will probably have to be reinvented for these WASM frameworks, unfortunately. For the moment they're probably better suited to high-complexity browser-based tooling that needs the extra performance, vs simple crud sites.
Edit: on second thought, for an entire multi-page site in one bundle this wouldn't be super huge. I'm used to smaller numbers but I'm also used to split-bundles.
- turtlebits 5y agoFor the site (including wasm) - (over the network) 597 kB transferred (uncompressed) 2.3 MB resources
- azakai 5y agoThe wasm file is dc7bb6f6208af7f13f16.module.wasm which is 2MB uncompressed.