5 ms·

It does not matter that much, relatively speaking. People include 1MB font libraries in their site without a care in the world, and force 1-2MB PNGs and JPEGs d

It does not matter that much, relatively speaking. People include 1MB font libraries in their site without a care in the world, and force 1-2MB PNGs and JPEGs down the wire without caring. A few extra bytes in jQuery is nothing compared to that.

pavel_lishin 3y ago
Especially if it's served from a CDN, and thus likely already cached. Then again, how many folks are using jquery these days? It might be more rare than I think.
- CharlesW 3y ago
  > Especially if it's served from a CDN, and thus likely already cached. Browsers no longer do cross-site resource caching. https://www.stefanjudis.com/notes/say-goodbye-to-resource-caching-across-sites-and-domains/ https://www.stefanjudis.com/notes/say-goodbye-to-resource-ca...
  - pavel_lishin 3y ago
    Ah, shows how much I know about front-end stuff these days!
porridgeraisin 3y ago
Yeah. However, it does matter in interactive websites because if the js is light it'll load fast and execute fast and you'll have interactivity sooner. It may be the case that images can be loaded later or arent even visible on the home page. And fonts of course will be replaced once they are loaded and the defaults will be used while it loads so it's progressive in a way.
- lofaszvanitt 3y ago
  Interactive websites are slow because they are including 1 MB frontend frameworks... and use these bloated modern frameworks to set a class on an element.
  - porridgeraisin 3y ago
    Yes, I was just pointing out why having huge fonts/images isnt as big of a blocker as huge JS on today's JS heavy apps with "loading placeholders" and what not. The browser also does font replacement fairly smoothly. Whether this whole bazaar is ideal or not is a separate issue :)
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
alserio 3y ago
js and images are not directly comparable, you also need to consider that the js has to be parsed and evaluated. so it really depends: it may matter

pavel_lishin 3y ago

Especially if it's served from a CDN, and thus likely already cached. Then again, how many folks are using jquery these days? It might be more rare than I think.

CharlesW 3y ago
> Especially if it's served from a CDN, and thus likely already cached. Browsers no longer do cross-site resource caching. https://www.stefanjudis.com/notes/say-goodbye-to-resource-caching-across-sites-and-domains/ https://www.stefanjudis.com/notes/say-goodbye-to-resource-ca...
- pavel_lishin 3y ago
  Ah, shows how much I know about front-end stuff these days!

porridgeraisin 3y ago

Yeah. However, it does matter in interactive websites because if the js is light it'll load fast and execute fast and you'll have interactivity sooner. It may be the case that images can be loaded later or arent even visible on the home page. And fonts of course will be replaced once they are loaded and the defaults will be used while it loads so it's progressive in a way.

lofaszvanitt 3y ago
Interactive websites are slow because they are including 1 MB frontend frameworks... and use these bloated modern frameworks to set a class on an element.
- porridgeraisin 3y ago
  Yes, I was just pointing out why having huge fonts/images isnt as big of a blocker as huge JS on today's JS heavy apps with "loading placeholders" and what not. The browser also does font replacement fairly smoothly. Whether this whole bazaar is ideal or not is a separate issue :)
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

alserio 3y ago

js and images are not directly comparable, you also need to consider that the js has to be parsed and evaluated. so it really depends: it may matter